Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 8 to 21 days

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut

Today's discussions and up to 7 days old[edit]

See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All current discussions

8 to 14 days old[edit]

May 18[edit]

Category:Anglo-Dutch Wars orders of battle[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one page in here, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason (talk) 23:01, 18 May 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:Disinformation operations[edit]

Nominator's rationale: this is follow-up on this previous discussion. After purging it is more clearly about disinformation, but does not clearly distinguish itself from its parent Category:Disinformation. Hence manually merge (only insofar appropriate). Marcocapelle (talk) 22:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Coddlebean, Nederlandse Leeuw, and Hmains: pinging contributors to previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:24, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 22:57, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    do not agree 'Disinformation' is a about a fact: false and misleading information. 'Disinformation operations' is about a process, something that people are organized to carry out, generally by a political entity of some kind. Very different articles involved, as they should be. Hmains (talk) 23:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Invasions by country[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 26#Category:Invasions by country


Category:Jewish prisoners and detainees[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 03:07, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I don't think that the intersection of being jewish and a prisoners and detainees is defining under WP:EGRS. Do we have categories for Christian gulag detainees? I also think that Jews who died in prison custody in not a defining intersection between location of death and ethnicity. Mason (talk) 20:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I hope I don't derail the entire discussion by bringing up the Holocaust, but... being Jewish as a prisoner is perhaps one of the most defining identity aspects in the 20th century. Just saying... The religious aspect does not appear to be as important as the "ethnic" or "cultural" aspects of Jewishness, so the comparison with Christian prisoners only goes so far. NLeeuw (talk) 20:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    To be clear, I agree with you that the Holocaust is very much defining at this intersection; however, none of the other intersection at this category meet that criteria. Also notably, Holocaust victims/survivors was not in the category, when I stumbled upon it, which I think implicitly might indicate that the Holocaust wasn't what the category maker had in mind.Mason (talk) 18:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair point, I did wonder why there were no Jewish concentration camp inmates in this category. We do have Category:Prisoners and detainees by nationality, but not Category:Prisoners and detainees by ethnicity (nor indeed Category:Prisoners and detainees by religion, deleted in 2020), where I would expect this category. There appears to be zero overlap with Category:Israeli prisoners and detainees; all these people were imprisoned in Europe (usually Russia or the Soviet Union), after which some emigrated to Israel. Only one appears to be a Holocaust survivor, namely Fania Fénelon. The rest was never arrested just for being Jewish, but always for some sort of political activity that may or may not have something to do with Judaism. Soo... Support per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 06:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per above discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:35, 20 May 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:Ukrainian-Jewish emigrants to the United Kingdom[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between being a Ukrainian emigrant to the United Kingdom, Being a Jewish emigrant to the United Kingdom, and being Ukrainian-Jewish. Mason (talk) 20:40, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Freely licensed images of non-free subject[edit]

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:Freely licensed images of non-free subjects. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Subject" should be plural. Ixfd64 (talk) 20:04, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No objections, as the concern is based on English usage. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy rename per WP:C2B WP:PLURALCAT. NLeeuw (talk) 20:58, 18 May 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:Mountaineering organizations[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 26#Category:Mountaineering organizations

Category:Mountaineering film directors[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There are several major 'climbing' directors (e.g. Jimmy Chin) that would fit in here but the category needs to be renamed (no need for two separate categories as there is a lot of overlap in the film sector). Aszx5000 (talk) 19:58, 18 May 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:Works about mountaineering[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 26#Category:Works about mountaineering

Category:Mountaineering films[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 26#Category:Mountaineering films

Category:Egyptian films by year[edit]

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: nomination withdrawn as the issue has been sorted out with the creation of appropriate subcategories. Bearcat (talk) 17:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Misconceived category scheme without precedent or siblings. Despite the name of the parent category here, the contents are not actually "by year" -- Wikipedia does not categorize films for the intersection of country with individual year of release anyway, so that wouldn't even be supportable. Instead, what's actually here is two subcategories for Egyptian films by century -- but that's not a thing we do either, because that's far too wide a classification to be useful when it comes to film, and no other country has anything like this.
And for added bonus, by far the majority of Egyptian films haven't even actually been filed under here at all: Category:Egyptian films by genre has around 500 films under it, while this has just 37.
We can and do cross-categorize films on the intersection of country with decade, so no prejudice against the creation of that scheme here if desired, but by-century is too broad to be a useful grouping when it comes to films.
The Category:Lists of Egyptian films by year subcategory is fine, but is already in Category:Lists of Egyptian films, so no replacement of this is needed. Bearcat (talk) 15:49, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisted per request.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:41, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted on the grounds that the second and third nominated categories do have siblings for other countries within e.g. Category:20th-century films. – Fayenatic London 14:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that the request was on grounds that are not actually applicable. While it is true that some other countries do have "films by century" categories, no other country has them to contain individual films as these do — where they do exist, they exist exclusively as container-only parents for the by-decade categories that Egypt doesn't have, and no other country has individual films being directly catted "by century" at all. So, again, if somebody is willing to buckle down and create by decade categories for Egypt, then these could be kept as parents for those by decade categories — but until by decade categories do exist, these do not need to exist with individual films filed directly in them, because that just isn't how films are categorized. Bearcat (talk) 21:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Certainly it appears that decade categories for Egyptian films can be sufficiently well populated for the 1950s onwards. If there are very few for earlier decades e.g. Gawhara in 1940s, why should those pages not be categorised directly in C20 Egyptian films? Compare Category:20th-century business films which has decade subcats for 1920s onwards, but holds The Love of Hetty Raimond (1917) directly. – Fayenatic London 14:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • The Love of Hetty Raymond doesn't actually contain any explanation of how it's a "business film" anyway — so it's not even clear that the category was justified there either, and I've had to remove it as unsourced and unexplained. So there are no other siblings left in Category:20th-century films that have any articles directly in them at all — they're all exclusively "decade subcategories only", and none of them contain even one film that isn't in a decade subcategory.
        And at any rate, I explicitly said that I was willing to withdraw this if somebody was willing to actually buckle down and create by-decade categories for Egypt — but they have to exist before they can be filed anywhere, so their potential to exist in the future is not a reason to keep provisional parent categories for them in advance of anybody actually being bothered to create them.
        Also, as I already noted above, there are several hundred other Egyptian films that haven't been filed in this scheme at all, so just because there aren't many 1940s Egyptian films here doesn't prove that we don't have others. I just did an AWB category-compare check of all Egyptian films against all 1940s films, and there are actually 35 Egyptian films under both trees, which is absolutely enough to support a 1940s category too. Bearcat (talk) 15:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Partial merge of the first to Category:Egyptian cinema by year. Keep the century categories which I have sub-catted by decade. When recategorising pages, I found some already in e.g. Category:1990s Arabic-language films. Should 1990s Egyptian be a diffusing sub-cat of 1990s Arabic-language? Or even if not sub-catted, should they be removed on the pattern of the rule stated at Category:Songs in English? – Fayenatic London 08:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since the century-vs-decade issue has been resolved by the creation of some the appropriate by-decade subcategories, I'm withdrawing this as promised since the century categories are now valid and warranted parentage and the "by year" category can now be resolved just by moving it. Bearcat (talk) 17:42, 23 May 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:Sportspeople who died in wars[edit]

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 will add Category:Lists of sportspeople who died in wars to Category:Sportspeople by cause of death and Category:War-related deaths by occupation. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 03:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A non-defining intersection of unrelated characteristics. User:Namiba 15:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. I do think that the Olympians category could make an interesting list, but the category itself isn't defining at the intersection, unless the sportperson died while they were actively participating in the sport. Mason (talk) 15:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What should we do about Category:Lists of sportspeople who died in wars? AHI-3000 (talk) 15:40, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Does not seem defining. I am also dubious about all the contents of Category:Lists of sportspeople who died in wars for similar reasons. However, the articles should be dealt with there before messing with the category. This is not a "but what about this one" situation where just because another bad category exists, this one can be kept. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I only made this category because both of the 2 preexisting subcategories were similar enough to each other. AHI-3000 (talk) 01:12, 19 May 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:Lists of films by date[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 26#Category:Lists of films by date

Category:Deuteronomistic history[edit]

Nominator's rationale: The category explanation is not universally accepted, see the last paragraph of the section Deuteronomistic history. If not merged, rename to Category:Former Prophets as a more useful title – see the section Former Prophets in the article Nevi'im. – Fayenatic London 11:24, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't agree that Deuteronomist does not belong. That article is about these books. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but the books aren't about the Deuteronomist. Moreover, it's in the name: the Book of Deuteronomy itself is not part of the Nevi'im but the Torah / Pentateuch. I think we agreed previously that we shouldn't be mixing up textual criticism with traditional Jewish and Christian divisions of the Bible; this is a logical follow-up of that agreement. NLeeuw (talk) 22:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:India MPs 2019–present[edit]

Nominator's rationale: The 2024 Indian general election was declared and is currently going on. The term of the previous MPs definitely ended in 2024. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why such a rush? Let's not close this discussion until the 2019 parliament is formally dissolved. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:19, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Defer / oppose per Marcocapelle / WP:CRYSTAL. NLeeuw (talk) 21:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I could have justified my reasoning more. The synopsis of the last day of the Budget session of parliament on February 10, has the following statements:
    • Page 27: "Hon. Prime Minister and Hon. Members, the tenure of this Lok Sabha is drawing to a close today with this session of the Seventeenth Lok Sabha."
    • Page 35: "The National Song was played. (Thereafter, Lok Sabha adjourned sine die)" -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Really, is India without a functioning parliament for a couple of months? In that case by all means rename. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canadian musicians by ethnic or national origin[edit]

Nominator's rationale: rename per parent categories Category:Musicians by ethnicity and Category:Canadian people by ethnicity. With the exception of the Asian subcategory this is about people's own ethnicity, not about their ancestors' nationality. The Asian subcategory may be moved directly under Category:Canadian musicians. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Executed French people[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: manual merge. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:13, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, primarily because this is diffusion by defunct administrative divisions (defunct since 2015), and secondarily because diffusion by administrative division leads to a trivial intersection. Manually merge insofar the articles aren't already in one of the other subcategories e.g. Category:French people executed by Nazi Germany. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. There's really no need to diffuse by location. Century and crime would be more useful for diffusion Mason (talk) 15:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 20:59, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:01, 18 May 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:Drakengard[edit]

Nominator's rationale: There seems to be enough articles for a split, with 11 going to Nier and 7 going to Drakengard. Bringing to CFD as I am uncertain in this split, and with Nier not having a series article yet. Category:Nier would also likely be a subcategory of Category:Drakengard. (Oinkers42) (talk) 22:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Drakengard still concerns both series and is solely titled "Drakengard". If it is split off into a Nier series article I'd have no qualms with this, but it's putting the cart before the horse. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not think a series article needs to be created before a category is created. (Oinkers42) (talk) 18:29, 12 May 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) 01:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose per Zxcvbnm. As is, the Drakengard article covers both the Drakengard and Nier as part of the same series, and makes no implication that they should be separate. I am sure there is enough coverage that one could make a separate Nier article, but that none exists at this point suggests to me that it isn't necessary, or that it is better to keep them together. Regardless of the reason, the categories should follow suit. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 08:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


May 17[edit]

Category:Major League Baseball Executive Vice Presidents for Baseball Operations[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 03:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge per WP:NONDEF; this isn't a high level front office position like general manager or president of baseball operations. Its also not a high level position like commissioner of baseball if we're talking about central office. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Let'srun (talk) 20:42, 19 May 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:Possible physical damages through anal sex[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 03:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Please see WP:OCASSOC. The medical conditions included in this category have a variety of causes; their possible association with anal sex is not a defining characteristic. (I was alerted to this questionable category by a note on my talk page.) gnu57 23:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:56, 17 May 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:Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 26#Category:Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia

Category:Lexington Avenue explosion[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All of the articles are sufficiently interlinked and the category contains just 3 articles. User:Namiba 20:19, 17 May 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:Heliports in Massachusetts[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Category:Heliports in Massachusetts


Category:20th-century Canadian people by religion[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:12, 17 May 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:Conspiracist media[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Category:Conspiracist media

Category:American Splendor artists[edit]

Convert Category:American Splendor artists to article American Splendor
Nominator's rationale: There is no scheme of Category:Artists by comic title or some such and this is analogous to WP:PERFCAT. Just make sure they are all listed (with citations) at the article on the comic. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:10, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to me that this is a useful category as it includes people not usually associated with their artwork, such as Alan Moore and Joyce Brabner. American Splendor was a unique title in many ways, given it was written by a single person but with dozens of different artists; it seems fitting that it merits a relatively unique category.
As a compromise, what if the category was just converted to "Category: American Splendor", not specifying artists? stoshmaster (talk) 17:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • If artists are purged the category will become empty. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:40, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What I meant was convert this category simply to "American Splendor" and it will house all things related to American Splendor, including the writers, artists, the film, and all related books (if they have separate articles) stoshmaster (talk) 20:35, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is not a defining characteristic of the subjects in this category. Moving this to article space is a good compromise between instant deletion and keeping. As a preliminary measure the category content may be copied to Talk:American Splendor before the category is deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:40, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I again propose that this category be rethought/renamed to Category:American Splendor where it will encompass all things related to American Splendor, including the writers, artists, the film, and all related books (if they have separate articles) -- stoshmaster (talk) 20:23, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • That sounds much like WP:OCASSOC and, again, it would not solve the problem at hand. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:31, 17 May 2024 (UTC) (added after relisting)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:23, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articlefy per nom and Marcocapelle, and echoing the concerns about turning this into a WP:OCASSOC problem. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional toothed whales[edit]

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:Fiction about whales. Discussion of the categorization of Moby-Dick can take place at Talk:Moby-Dick. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article and it is not about a fictional character but about a literary work. (Oinkers42) (talk) 14:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - While the name of the work is the fictional character (so the character should be tagged, not the work), a single-entry category is not helpful. Tag the character article with the parent category, remove the tag from the work article, and remove this category. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:21, 17 May 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:Jat politicians from Rajasthan[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: As per long standing consensus here, biographies of living people cannot be categorised by caste.Ratnahastin (talk) 14:12, 17 May 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:Jewish delicatessens in Oregon[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to parent category; only has one category layer. No need to upmerge to Category:Delicatessens in Oregon as its already in Category:Delicatessens in Portland, Oregon. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:55, 17 May 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:Nuclear technology companies of Argentina[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one page in the category FightBrightTigh (talk) 10:33, 17 May 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:Engineering companies of Algeria[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one page in the category FightBrightTigh (talk) 10:33, 17 May 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:Engineering companies of Israel[edit]

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 and add StoreDot to Category:Manufacturing companies of Israel. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:05, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one page in the category. FightBrightTigh (talk) 10:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:East German people by ethnic or national origin[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory which is already part of Category:Immigrants to East Germany. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:06, 17 May 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:Northern Mariana Islands people by ethnic or national origin[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename for consistency. Both parent and child categories are "by descent". Marcocapelle (talk) 08:57, 17 May 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:Romanian people by ethnic or national origin and occupation[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Category:Romanian people by ethnic or national origin and occupation

Category:Montana articles lacking sources[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The category is not connected to a template so not helpful as maintenance category. If kept should either have a template created, or be tied to Template:WikiProject Montana. Gonnym (talk) 08:07, 17 May 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:Cricket lists incorrectly assessed as articles[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I can't find this category used by Template:WikiProject Cricket. This was probably used by a previous version of the code or a now deleted sub-template and is no longer used. Gonnym (talk) 07:58, 17 May 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:Middle Eastern people by ethnic or national origin[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We do not categorize descent categories by regions; we only group them by continents and countries. I do not see any valid reason to make an exception for the Middle East. They are all just container categories. Note: Category:People of Middle Eastern descent is the opposite; I do not propose to delete it! Aldij (talk) 07:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:59, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Normally I would have said, disperse between Asian and African, but I believe that the subcategories are already in these trees. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 02:50, 19 May 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:Abolish Self Government Coalition politicians[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: As per WP:SMALLCAT LibStar (talk) 07:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, this is not helpful for navigation. (Note that WP:SMALLCAT is defunct because it contained a number of too subjective clauses.) Marcocapelle (talk) 09:26, 17 May 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:Defunct World TeamTennis teams[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:09, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 1.) we don't categorize by current status and 2.) the league is defunct, so all teams are defunct. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, I do not know about (1) but (2) alone is an obvious enough reason for merging. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We do actually categorize sports teams by current status. However, while the league is not officially defunct, it might as well be since there hasn't been an update since 2022 on its functions. Hence merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:53, 17 May 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.

Women's Premier League (cricket) sub-categories[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: In order to match the Parent article / category's naming pattern. Vestrian24Bio (U • T • A • C • S) 04:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merged requests Vestrian24Bio (U • T • A • C • S) 04:15, 17 May 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:Cask strength[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:09, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is really not helpful for navigation. I tried to find a 2nd parent category, and it made it clear to me that we really don't need a category for Cask strength Mason (talk) 02:48, 17 May 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:1940 Michigan-Ontario Collegiate Conference football season[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category lacks subjects Let'srun (talk) 01:55, 17 May 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:Michigan-Ontario Collegiate Conference football seasons[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Category:Michigan-Ontario Collegiate Conference football seasons

Category:Singles by decade by record label[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Category:Singles by decade by record label

Category:Extinct Indigenous peoples of Australia[edit]

Nominator's rationale: no accurate reliable sources to verify such a classification, even the category descroption says "This category is not necessarily indicative of total loss of population, traditions, language or culture - each specific case may have particular individual contexts" that its unable to be clearerly define or even confirm that the launguage, culture, people, knowledge, country is actually extinct Wikipedia should not be categorising as such. Gnangarra 13:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gnangarra The category description can be changed. If articles can use past tense words like "were" and "was" in reference to a tribe, I'm not seeing why the word "extinct" is out of question. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 18:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is the issue of using the "tribes" to decsribe Indigenous Countries, Cultures and People in Australia is inaccurate at best racist at worst. The term itself implies a lot of colonial misinformation and a distinct lack of understanding of Indigenous Cutlures in Australia. The use of past tense in words like were or was is also not an indicator of the Indigenous Countries, cultures, languages or peoples continuation. Very specifically by calling a Country extinct that frees the restriction of cultural protocols applying when working on with Indugenous Cultural materials. All countries are still in existance and are represented through Land Councils who manage everything from protocols on entering a country, to land rights. My reasoning is not playing words games its saying that the assumption of being extinct is a misnomer, even in languages and cultures where a recent Language conference in Queensland a professor was luaghed off stage when he stated that a language was extinct yet multiple people stood up and spoke the language. Without rocksolid gold plate sources published within the last 4 years the label of extinct is a false narrative derived from the recent history wars, and anti landrights campaigners. The other issue we have is the Australian Bureau of Statistics problematic collection of reliable data as it records just one language spoken not all In the context of the Census, 'Indigenous' or 'First Nations' results are defined by respondents who have answered that they are of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander background. There are over 230 Australian Indigenous Languages that the Census records which is less than the actual number of Indigenous languages.[1]. Gnangarra 09:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the use of "tribe" isn't my decision. It is used for many articles about Aboriginal Australian groups, so that seems to perhaps be a wider issue worth fixing. What is the continuation of a group like the Toogee? What is the relevant land council? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 07:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tribe is not used in Australia, the poor use of terms in Wikipedia articles is one of the many barriers people working with Indigenous cultures struggle to address as shows Wikipedia in a bad light and not respectful of the culture. Basically ticks all the racists, Inforwar, challenge faced out on the street its up to us to lift our standards. Gnangarra 12:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, it is questionable if ethnic groups become extinct at all. A language may become extinct for sure, but ethnic groups mostly dissolve in other ethnic groups. - But this comment applies to the whole tree of Category:Extinct ethnic groups. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:24, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle Aren't we talking about cultural extinction? Are you defining extinction as the literal death of all group members without any descendants? That seems like an unorthodox interpretation. The Susquehannock people are extinct as a tribe, despite having some descendants in the Seneca-Cayuga Nation. I don't see any contradiction here. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 18:41, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Frustratingly, the term "extinct" seems to be used somewhat inconsistently for both cultural extinction and the death of all group members (at least, from a google search). Is there a better term we could use to distinguish the two? Category:Extinct ethnic groups is currently a subcategory under Category:Human extinction which implies the latter, so perhaps it should be renamed and/or categorized differently if most of the members are groups that are only culturally extinct. Psychastes (talk) 19:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Seneca-Cayuga Nation is not an Indigenous Country in Australia, you are making comparisons that are not like for like. Gnangarra 09:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And? I'm addressing Marcocapelle's statement about the broader category tree. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 04:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If not an outright deletion then certainly a renaming to be more clear would seem to be a good idea.★Trekker (talk) 20:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What would you propose and why? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 04:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Genocide happens. Wishful thinking doesn't change that. "Extinct" is a harsh and ugly word to apply to people; it's natural to recoil in disgust at the idea. It may be very appealing to think that a group "didn't really go extinct" because some of their descendants blended into other groups. But if the group no longer exists as a distinct people with a distinct culture and language, the group really is extinct. Perhaps something like Category:Former Indigenous peoples would be less noxious to the moral sense of the reader. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 04:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Genocide happens — In particular Genocide of Indigenous Australians. Mitch Ames (talk) 04:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mitch Ames That leads to two questions. Is there even one example in all of Australian history of an entire group being murdered without any known descendants? Are there any examples of groups who, through genocidal violence and assimilation, ceased to exist as distinct cultural groups? In both cases, there would have to be terminology to describe a group that once was and now is no longer. If not "extinct", there would still have to be some other description. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 10:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, we need to be careful not to conflate "genocide" and "extinction". Genocide does not require killing all of the people - it is defined as "intentional destruction ... in whole or in part". Extinction requires that they all die, but doesn't require intent. There may be an overlap, but they are not the same thing, and neither implies the other. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    agree genocide doesnt equate to extinction. @Bohemian Baltimore perhaps you should start with List of massacres of Indigenous Australians to understand the extent of Geonicidal acts in Australia. Gnangarra 12:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gnangarra Since my meaning apparently wasn't clear; there are genocidal acts of violence which lead to the literal or cultural destruction of peoples. What terminology would you use to refer to groups that have been physically annihilated in entirety through genocidal violence, disease, etc? What terminology would you use to refer to historical groups that may have living descendants but that are no longer culturally distinct due to genocidal violence, etc? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 13:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is the issue the assumptions here are made based on the use of past tense language in the article, none of them have any reliable sources to support being included in this category. Given that the category itself should be deleted. Gnangarra 13:33, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gnangarra There are a small number of articles. I do not have a strong opinion on the category, whether it should be renamed or deleted. But I reiterate my question; are there any historical Indigenous Australian groups that can be said to have once existed but that no longer do? What terminology should be used to refer to those historical groups? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 15:34, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I dont have any reliable sources to answer that question, all I know is the articles in this category dont have reliable sources to even be included in the category. The whole purpose of raising it here is exatcly the category itself not some wider theoretical discussion on meanings or what ifs. I gather I can remove them all from this category for lack of sourcing that clearly supports the claim. Gnangarra 12:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gnangarra How would you feel about a category such as Category:Historical Indigenous peoples in Australia, Category:Historical Indigenous peoples, etc. or would that involve the same quandaries? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 07:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    to quotes The articles are fine in Category:Aboriginal peoples of Queensland anyway. Marcocapelle Gnangarra 05:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mitch Ames I'm not conflating genocide and extinction; I myself belong to a group whose history includes the former but not the latter. But I would question why the word extinction has to automatically mean everybody dies. I don't think a term like "cultural extinction" implies that. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 13:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    why the word extinction has to automatically mean everybody dies — Because when we are talking about people, that's what the word means "Extinction is the termination ... by the death of its last member." Admittedly if we are talking about culture we could say that the group is extinct if nobody belongs to it. (If we all gave up editing and WMF deleted Wikipedia, Wikipedians could be said to be "extinct", but most us would still be alive.)
    My main point here is that we should probably not use the word "genocide" in this discussion, because it is neither necessary nor sufficient for "extinction", and is unnecessarily emotive. Yes genocide happened, but that does not determine whether a particular people is extinct or not. Mitch Ames (talk) 14:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mitch Ames Okay. So what terminology should we use for "cultural extinction"? What terminology should we use to refer to historical groups that no longer exist as distinct cultures? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 15:26, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The term "cultural extinction" is not helpful at all. Even if there is no tangible remainders of a culture you never know how much of customs and oral literature have been exchanged with and integrated in other cultures. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Yes, but that doesn't mean that the group still exists. So what terminology would you use for a group that once existed and does not now? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 17:12, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: having now been through every article not one defines the culture, people, or country as extinct, sadly Tindale works from 1974 is the primary source in every article and the most recent. The issue there their inclusion is based on whoever started the article using a generic type sentence like according to tindale they (some past tense word) from this area in Queensland. Ironically the only article with recent sourcing is about the current issue of domestic violance in Australia which makes no sense as its in this category. Gnangarra 12:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Presumably you could solve the problem by changing "The Xxxx were ..." to "The Xxxx are ..." (other verb tense changes as appropriate), and providing a reliable source to support the statement of their continued existence. Mitch Ames (talk) 14:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I could change the wording, but as all the articles are basically say Tindale described these countries on his map as being xxxx, their inclusion in the category isnt based on reliable sources or hints of a reference to Extinct. I suggest the category becomes extinct. Gnangarra 14:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Possible alternatives to "extinct", for the purposes of renaming the category (tree):
    * Historical: we already have Category:Historical ethnic groups of Australia - which possibly should be merged (one way or the other) with Category:Extinct Indigenous peoples of Australia. Note that Category:Extinct ethnic groups is a subcat of Category:Historical ethnic groups, so probably Category:Extinct Indigenous peoples of Australia (if it remains) should be a subcat of Category:Historical ethnic groups by continent
    * nonextant
    Mitch Ames (talk) 01:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 01:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - for the record I had created this category in response to seeing a universal category being created for Extinct Indigenous groups, including Australian people, it seemed at the time better to identify the Australian component of an apparent claim. Note that by creating the category, I did not necessarily agree with either the category title or its assumptions, which is why I placed in bold comments as to the very specific event/issue raised in articles. I am intrigued by the discussion to date, as it seems either concentrating upon category trees and related subjects, or the issues of how to name groups of people who have been affected by reduction or severe loss of population. As the process in this particular part of wikipedia is relative to categories, there is a problem as to whether the actual subject is best ventured as to the veracity of terminology. It could be for everyones advantage to delete the original parent category, and find somewhere other than this CFD to explore the issues that are raised here. A collaborative approach to the wider wikipedian understanding of how to 'frame' the larger world wide issue of how and when ethnic groups have decimation of population is something well beyond the bounds of this cfd, and to simply arrive at a decision here on one small perspective does the larger project some significant disservice. Definitely not a 'free for all' RFC or similar, it needs a very specific guideline and process that works through the issues raised here, for the larger project. But then this is wikipedia, anything could happen. JarrahTree 02:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Alder carrs[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Category:Alder carrs

Category:Rebel princes[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:C2D: main article princely rebellion. NLeeuw (talk) 22:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alt proposal rationale by Marcocapelle (opposed speedy rename): this is a category of princes, not so much of rebellions. Perhaps split. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: which option?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Fwiw, I would also be fine with keeping as is. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Alright, that simply means I should create separate category B and manually move all applicable items there. I think we can close this CFD and do it ourselves, as no admin action is required. NLeeuw (talk) 21:33, 20 May 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:Officers of Ipswich Corporation[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Category:Officers of Ipswich Corporation

Category:Religious buildings and structures destroyed in the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Category:Religious buildings and structures destroyed in the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent

Category:Armenian screenwriters by century[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. (Even if a 2nd category were made, it still wouldn't be helpful as this is the only category in the in parent) Mason (talk) 20:08, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. By the way the subcategory covers the century that is probably the least interesting to people who study history of literature. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The problem here is that Category:21st-century Armenian screenwriters is using the standardized {{Screenwriters by nationality and century category header}} framework — but that template autogenerates an artificially-transcluded "[Country-named-in-this-category] screenwriters by century" as a standard part of its formatting. But that can't be left to sit there redlinked, so either it has to exist regardless of any size issues, or we have to wrap the template in {{suppress categories}} to bork its category generation and then manually file Category:21st-century Armenian screenwriters in the other categories that still exist. But that would defeat the entire purpose of using the standardized template in the first place, and would have the side-effect of stranding that category from the Category:Screenwriters by nationality and century tree.
    I'm not at all wedded to this being essential, and have personally wrapped many category-generating templates in the suppress categories wrapper when necessary, but just wanted to point out that there are "standardized formatting" considerations here beyond size.
    Really, it's more a question of whether Category:Armenian screenwriters need any by-century categorization yet — with only six people in the 21st-century category and only 20 in the parent, it's not clear that subbing them out for century is needed at all — but if the 21st-century category does exist, then this is automatically imposed and transcluded by the template as a standard and expected parent for it, so the question is really less about the need for this than it is the need for a 21st-century category to exist at all. Bearcat (talk) 15:05, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bearcat, I'm not sure how the this comment is relevant to the nomination at hand. And, for the record, it isn't the case the FOOian occupation by century needs to exist. That category is only added if it exists, otherwise, the category is added to FOOian screenwriters. Mason (talk) 19:43, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As a person who works regularly with cleaning up redlinked categories at Special:WantedCategories, I have to deal with new redlinked categories autogenerated by occupation header templates of this type all the phunking time. So just telling me that they suppress redlinks isn't convincing when I routinely see hard evidence that they don't. Bearcat (talk) 13:45, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you have examples of this that are recent (like since April 6th)? Because each time there's been an red link, I've added a fix to address it [2]. The present code exclusively uses resolve category redirects and checks if the category exists before it adds it. If you have evidence to the contrary, I would really like to see it so that I can figure out what is not working as intended. Mason (talk) 20:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:40, 9 May 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) 00:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as nominated, in the understanding that Mason can fix {{Screenwriters by nationality and century category header}} if it causes problems. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:11, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ships built on the River Orwell[edit]

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 Category:Ships built on the River Orwell and Category:Ships built in Suffolk to Category:Ships built in England. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This is a redundant layer. Mason (talk) 00:46, 17 May 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:Populated places on the Underground Railroad[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Category:Populated places on the Underground Railroad

Category:Hindu temples destroyed by Muslims[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There's really not a need to diffuse this category by perpetrator Mason (talk) 04:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Current thoughts on merging?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom is fine. My comment was on a grandchild category, but the proposal as it stands is sound. NLeeuw (talk) 21:36, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


May 16[edit]

Central Bohemian Region geography stubs[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub templates. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:45, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: All of these stub types are contained within Category:Central Bohemian Region geography stubs and have been combined into one. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:45, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, I checked "what links here" for the first two and no article popped up. Is there a more easy way to check this? Marcocapelle (talk) 07:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I identified all of the categories that contained only a stub template. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Czech geo-stubs are uniformly sorted by regions and there is no reason to sort one unsystematically by districts. Yes, the Central Bohemian Region is bigger than the others, but even so, it is not over-sized per Wikipedia:Stub#Guidelines On the contrary, division by district would cause that they would by under-sized stub categories (currently, the average per district is 62 stubs and the number is decreasing). FromCzech (talk) 06:48, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per standard WPSS practice and populate. @LaundryPizza03, Marcocapelle, and FromCzech: There is clear evidence that the templates and categories were originally acknowledged for use at WP:WPSS (they are listed here). It seems that actually using the templates was overlooked rather than discouraged. There is also clear evidence that they would be useful - the Central Bohemia category was over the limit at which it should be split at WPSS (600 stubs). It seems that simply no-one got round to populating them. This not "unsystematic" - Central Bohemia is the only region of the Czech Republic to have reached the 600 stub threshold for splitting. Others are getting close, but are not there yet. I've populated two of the categories, both of which are over the threshold, but have now paused at the request of User:FromCzech, despite all I am doing is using the stub templates as they were intended. If the categories do not measure up to the 60+ stubs needed for each, then they can be upmerged with no prejudice against them being re-created if and when they meet the required 60 stub standard. In any case, the original proposal, of deleting the templates, is flawed. If the templates were malformed or not in accordance to stub sorting practice, they would be deleted, but these should simply be upmerged to the main category as per standard stub-sorting practice, with the categories proposed for deletion. Have a look at, say Category:Ireland geography stubs to see this practice in action. The easiest way to tell whether they reach that standard already is to stub them appropriately, which should happen anyway if there are better stub templates available, which there are. As such, I am simply following standard practice for WPSS - and also for CFD, in which there is long-standing tradition that if it can be shown that a category is useful (which in stub-sorting means reaching the 60-stub threshold) it will likely be kept. PS: If they are a historical relic, as FromCzech suggests, then they should not be categorised within the permcats for the various districts (e.g., Category:Populated places in Benešov District) and the whole of the Central Bohemia catalogue tree needs to be changed. Grutness...wha? 05:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see. Well if someone is going to populate them, I wouldn't mind of course. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will once @FromCzech: says it's OK to :) Grutness...wha? 08:48, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have some stupid questions and comments because I don't know much about stub-sorting and English is not my native language, so maybe I didn't understand something. First, districts were included in Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types/Geography in 2010 – that's pretty out of date and should be updated, not taken as the 2024 standard. Considering the number of municipalities in the region, there were about 1,100 stubs at that time and today the situation is different. From this point of view, I called them a historical relic.
    Second, where does the 600+ stub limit come from? I couldn't find it anywhere in WP. The definition of over-sized category is 800+. The Central Bohemian Region stub category has been below 800 for a long time, currently around 740 stubs. That's not much. It is consistent within the country and better than splitting it into undersized stub categories, or having half in the main category and half split. (Out of 12 districts, 2 districts would currently have approx. 80 stubs, 4 districts would have 60–70 stubs and 6 districts under 60. Even the largest categories are small). I don't understand exactly what the upmerge is, but anyway I think that whether the categories get deleted or not, they shouldn't be used. FromCzech (talk) 18:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @FromCzech: The Stub types list is a list of stub types created and used by the Stub-sorting WikiProject. Stub types on it don't become archaic - they're simply added to when more types come along. The templates themselves are rarely deleted, though they may get redirected to a parent ctegory or become redirects to a more basic stub template. As to the 600... hmm, I note that Wikipedia:Stub says 800, but the WikiProject has been using 600 as a threshold for many years. An upmerge simply means that the template would be kept, but that rather than pointing to a specific category, it would point to the parent - e.g., Template:KutnáHora-geo-stub (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) would populsate the main Category:Central Bohemian Region geography stubs rather than a separate Kutná Hora category. This is frequently done with stub types - templates used on over 60 articles would be split out into their own categories, ones that don't get that many would simply populate the parent category. So in this case, four districts would keep their stub categories, the rest would be umpmerged into the main category. PS - not a silly question - stubs are complicated. And if my Czech was as good as your English, I'd be very happy! :) Grutness...wha? 04:43, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If 600+ is just an unwritten rule, we don't have to stick to it. In theory, there could be a situation where there would be 12 categories of 59 stubs each, giving over 700. This shows that 600–800 should remain a gray area, where division should only follow if it clearly makes sense and not where it is not systematic.
    If there are no stub categories by district and in other regions, the unwritten rules of stubsorting cannot convince me that they should remain in the CB region, even upmerged. They should disappear so that the region is dealt with in the same way as the others. But I believe that within eight weeks I will reduce the number of stubs in all 60+ CB districts so that there will be no controversy left and everyone will be satisfied. FromCzech (talk) 17:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Even if you regard 600-800 as a grey area where categories are not needed, the templates should still remain. They are accepted or use by the stub-sorting project and is clearly systematic given the identical splits for large categories in other countries - and templates are already created and upmerged for some other Czech regions (e.g., {{Jihlava-geo-stub}}, {{Pardubice-geo-stub}}). If you wish for the categories to be upmerged, that is fine (though unusual in the case of subcategories that clearly pass the 60-stub threshold), but there is no logic whatsoever to removing templates that were proposed and approved for creation for use by stub sorters. Simply upmerging them will save a lot of work later when (far more likely than if) the category reaches 800 stubs. Grutness...wha? 13:19, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, if upmerge means that, like the examples you mentioned, the category will not be used and will only remain available in case of a sudden rise in stubs, then let them stay there for now. But if in 3+ years it turns out that the CB region has less than 600 stubs and they are not needed in the long term, then their existence should be re-evaluated for the sake of systematicity (as well as the remaining 7 stub categories of districts, a total of 19 districts out of 76, representing 2,5 out of 13 regions – there really isn't a system to it). Given WP:NGEO and the constant decline of stubs, a rise above 800 is unlikely. FromCzech (talk) 18:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wisconsin-road-stub[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:40, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WestIndies-cricket-season-stub[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:39, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WashingtonCountyID-geo-stub[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:39, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uruguay-cemetery-stub[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:39, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:North American sports venue stubs[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Only contents are a stub template that does not populate the category. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:37, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:New Zealand-cricket-ground-stub[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:India-cricket-season-stub[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:30, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ecuadorian company stubs[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:29, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete category. The template already feeds into its parents. Grutness...wha? 03:59, 18 May 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.

Template:Bhutan-tv-stub[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:27, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to parent (Category:Bhutan stubs) per standard WPSS practice. Grutness...wha? 03:59, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Grutness: when you say redirect, do you mean keep the template but have it populate Category:Bhutan stubs? (This also applies to other nominations on this page; I am arbitrarily picking one rather than pinging you a bunch of times.) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:16, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, exactly. That's standard stubbing practice. If the template is there, then it can still be used, it just doesn't need a category. It's the categories which should be nominated for deletion, not the templates. Stub templates are quite often either left unused, emptied, or simply used to fill a parent category. Grutness...wha? 04:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2020s-Western-film-stub[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:25, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1960s-Tamil-film-stub[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to parent (Category:Tamil-language film stubs) per standard WPSS practice. In many of today's nominations, it looks like there is serious undersorting of stubs rather than an actual lack of need for their use. Grutness...wha? 03:59, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1950s-UK-single-stub[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:22, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to parent (Category:British single stubs) per standard WPSS practice. In many of today's nominations, it looks like there is serious undersorting of stubs rather than an actual lack of need for their use. Grutness...wha? 03:45, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:ZeniMax Media stubs[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 24#Category:ZeniMax Media stubs

North Yorkshire geography stubs[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Unused stub templates. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to parent (Category:North Yorkshire geography stubs) per standard WPSS practice. In many of today's nominations, it looks like there is serious undersorting of stubs rather than an actual lack of need for their use. See comments under Central Bohemian geography stubs, above. Again, as there, the templates would be autimatically kept - it should be the categories that are proposed for deletion/upmerging. Grutness...wha? 03:59, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • They're now all finally used as they should be. Some of them (Harrogate, Hambledon, Richmondshire) have categories which are well over 60 stubs; the other templates can be upmerged - although serveral are close to the 60-stub threshold. Not sure why these were never used in the first place. Grutness...wha? 08:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • They were not used as I changed them to the parent North Yorkshire ready to delete them. Keith D (talk) 16:25, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • Gah. 1) why didn't you say that they were no longer used rather than unused, which implies that they had never been used?; 2 why didn't you comment when I said they were victims of undersorting?; and 3) why did you empty them prior to a deletion discussion which may result in them being kept? If you wanted to change them all to North Yorkshire, all you had to do was turn the templates into redirects to {{NorthYorkshire-geo-stub}}. You didn't need to go through this whole process! If you do go through this process, don't empty them first - do what it says to do on the tfd template! PS - if these districts are no longer used, what areas do you suggest splitting North Yorkshire into for stub purposes, as the NYk geo stub category will be over the 600 stub threshold for splitting? Grutness...wha? 16:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as "what links here" gives a list of articles that someone working on, for example, Craven, would want to develop. (The proposal is to delete the template, not the category, so admittedly the category could serve the same purpose.) --Northernhenge (talk) 18:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Erm, no it wouldn't. Stub categories re populated by the template, so without the template there'd be no category! Grutness...wha? 05:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete districts aren't generally a good way of dividing stubs (or set categories) into. Its normally best to just put all in the ceremonial county. In addition these districts have been abolished for over a year. Also do the same with the Cornish ones. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete they are all out of date as have been abolished and just upmerge the categories they populated to North Yorkshire where they should now reside. Keith D (talk) 16:25, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Grutness, now that the cats are populated. Her Pegship (?) 17:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ranellidae stubs[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only 6 articles. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:10, 16 May 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.

Shoot 'em up stub subtypes[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:33, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Insufficiently large stub categories that together are barely smaller than the parent stub category, Category:Shoot 'em up stubs (137). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:09, 16 May 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:Quintana Roo radio station stubs[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Too small; only extant stub category for Quintana Roo. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:05, 16 May 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:Queensland river stubs[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Insufficient contents to justify a standalone category for this stub type. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:03, 16 May 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:Queen Elizabeth Land geography stubs[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Insufficiently large to justify a standalone stub category. The associated stub category, {{QueenElizabethLand-geo-stub}}, will probably be kept. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:59, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upmerge category. Make that "The associated stub template [...] will definitely be kept" and I agree. It looks like a lot of small stub articles on individual mountains, nunataks, etc., have been merged into articles on mountain ranges, which makes sense. A shame, since the basic Antarctica geo-cat had been completely subdivided and now a second subcat's being merged back into it. Took me months to do that! Grutness...wha? 05:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Keeping the stub template is default in a nomination like this, isn't it? Marcocapelle (talk) 07:08, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom --Lenticel (talk) 03:14, 18 May 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:Qarchak County geography stubs[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Insufficient contents to warrant a separate stub category. The associated stub template, {{Qarchak-geo-stub}}, will not be deleted due to its systematic nature. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:55, 16 May 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:Arabian Gulf Futsal Cup[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:45, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The GCC Futsal Cup page (the main page for this category) was moved to "Arabian Gulf Futsal Cup" in 2018 without any explanation or source for the name change. I have not found any evidence that the name of this tournament (which hasn't been held since 2015) was actually changed. Hence, I have moved the page back to GCC Futsal Cup and ask that the category also be moved back. Hashim-afc (talk) 20:05, 16 May 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:Alsatian people[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge (or reverse merge), very overlapping categories. Article List of Alsatians and Lotharingians describes Alsatians as people from the region Alsace. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:35, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Seems reasonable to me. Mason (talk) 21:03, 24 May 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:Languages of Alsace[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:27, 16 May 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:Tschugguel family[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There are only two people in this category, which isn't helpful for navigation, and it is not clear how/if they are related. Delete for now, no objection to recreation if it becomes useful. Mason (talk) 19:03, 16 May 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.

Ancient law (before 6th century BC)[edit]

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 as nominated and to Category:13th-century BC works, Category:7th-century BC works, and Category:7th century BC in international relations as applicable. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A collection of chronology categories that contain only one subcategory each; the 13th- and 7th-century BC subcategories also contain one article each, but Category:6th-century BC executions is excluded because it contains 5 articles. I think we will need a Category:Law by millennium tree to cover ancient laws, including ones that are even older than these categories (eg. Category:2nd-millennium BC executions, Code of Hammurabi from the 18th-century BC). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:16, 16 May 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:Jewish mimes[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCEGRS User:Namiba 17:16, 16 May 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:Rajput clans of India[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Are there any not of India? * Pppery * it has begun... 15:51, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, there is no point in splitting this between India and Pakistan. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:02, 16 May 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:YouTubers of Jewish descent[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category should either be renamed to match the current norm of Jewish FOOers. Or deleted/merged to YouTubers as being descended from Jewish people is not defining (as opposed to being Jewish, which might be in this case) Mason (talk) 13:58, 16 May 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:Louisville White Sox (1914-1915) players[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:28, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is an uncontroversial technical request but I don't see the option to indicate that using Twinkle. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 13:48, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 16:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:00, 18 May 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 from Ewloe[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:28, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Ewloe is a small village. Upmerge for now, until there's actually enough people to need diffusion Mason (talk) 12:59, 16 May 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.

Omaha people[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 24#Omaha people

Category:French people of Lorrainian descent[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, the category contains articles about French people who lived long after the Duchy of Lorraine was annexed by France: this happened end of the 18th century. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:07, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. This also doesn't really feel like a defining feature for any of the people in this category. Mason (talk) 13:00, 16 May 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:Meuse-Argonne American Cemetery[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 24#Category:Meuse-Argonne American Cemetery

Category:Politics of Lorraine[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 24#Category:Politics of Lorraine

Category:Palestinian musicians by genre[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:03, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category in here, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason (talk) 02:19, 16 May 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:Sikh monarchs[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: dual merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The parents seem to be inappropriate but they do fit the content. All Sikhs in this category are Punjabis, all Jats in this category are Sikhs. The content of this category shouldn't be moved out of the Punjabi or Jat tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That they do fit the content is irrelevant; we've got other trees for that. Chand Kaur is already in Category:Punjabi women, for example. Btw Duleep Singh was a Christian for several decades, so we can't assume all of them to have been Sikhs ever. If we really wanna categorise all that in 1 category, then we should rename them Category:Punjabi Sikh Jat emperors or something. NLeeuw (talk) 16:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:49, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the alt proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:56, 16 May 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:Albanian rights activists[edit]

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:Albanian nationalists in Kosovo and purge Category:Activists of the Albanian National Awakening‎. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:01, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I think we should rename this category so it is easier to distinguish from Albanian activists. I think that this category is supposed to be Activists who advocate for the rights of Albanian people, as opposed to activists who are albanian nationals. Similar categories like this one are Category:Activists for Hispanic and Latino American civil rights & Category:Activists for African-American civil rights Mason (talk) 22:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 06:16, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 08:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Comments on the deletion proposal would be very much appreciated! (If there is no further participation, I would expect this discussion would result in a rename.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:48, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Smasongarrison, Nederlandse Leeuw, and Bohemian Baltimore: please comment on the alt deletion proposal. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not opposed to purging. But there are folks in there like Ali Aliu, who seems to be defined by both his nationalism and his support of rights of ethnic albanians. Mason (talk) 04:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    All 5 people in this category seem to be ethnic Albanians in Kosovo who were/are opposed to oppression of Kosovo Albanians by Serbs, as well as nationalists who sought independence or unification with Albania. But it is a mixed bag. One is a militant rebel, another is an educator. I suppose we could Merge them all to Category:Albanian nationalists in Kosovo, where 3 out of 5 of them already are. The subcategory has nothing to do with Kosovo per se, and should be Purged. NLeeuw (talk) 06:15, 16 May 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:Cartoon Network stubs[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 24#Category:Cartoon Network stubs


May 15[edit]

Category:Unreal Engine 5 games[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 23#Category:Unreal Engine 5 games


Category:Ministerial departments of the Sierra Leone Government[edit]

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) Qwerfjkltalk 15:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining distinction that doesn't help navigation Mason (talk) 20:14, 15 May 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:Oxford University Press Delegate[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 23#Category:Oxford University Press Delegate


Category:Block books[edit]

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) Qwerfjkltalk 15:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is not helpful navigation. It contains the epon article and one book. As described on the category page, this does not seem like a defining feature... "Block books or blockbooks, also called xylographica, are short books of up to 50 leaves, block printed in Europe in the second half of the 15th century as woodcuts with blocks carved to include both text (usually) and illustrations." Mason (talk) 20:01, 15 May 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:Ipswich town preachers[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 23#Category:Ipswich town preachers

Category:Categories without CatAutoTOC and friends[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 23#Category:Categories without CatAutoTOC and friends

Category:Georgetown College (Kentucky)[edit]

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:Georgetown College. Unopposed for two weeks. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:40, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: In line with the main article, Georgetown College. Graham (talk) 02:08, 30 April 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) 01:12, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Adam Black talk • contributions 16:21, 15 May 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:Deaths from food poisoning[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Conflict in naming conventions between Category:Deaths from digestive disease and Category:Deaths from infectious disease; and Category:Deaths by poisoning. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – I think we mostly use "deaths by" for intentional killings, "deaths from" or "deaths due to" where there was no intention. The current name seems to be natural English, but Category:Deaths due to food poisoning sounds OK as an alternative. – Fayenatic London 10:50, 1 May 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) 23:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Comments on FL's proposal would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 16:04, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American people of Arab descent[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Empty category, fork of the Category:American people of Middle Eastern descent. Aldij (talk) 15:34, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all, the single article is already in Category:American politicians of Lebanese descent and it isn't even about someone of Arab descent. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:31, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle Apparently this category was deleted previously. Where is the deletion discussion for that? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 10:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle Never mind. I found it. As I expected, a quickie deletion with very little input and seemingly no input from Arabs. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 10:57, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I would like to register my shock and disbelief that Arab American and Arab diaspora categories are slowly and systematically being deleted across Wikipedia, often with little input (from anyone, let alone Arabs). It is a massive erasure of Arabs and Arab Americans. I do regard it as unjust, rash, and enormously racist. These are major changes and there needs to be major discussion. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 10:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It has nothing to do with racism. Arab descent is difficult to verify because they are the majority ethnicity of the Middle East and North Africa. Sources are more explicit about minorities. Likewise we do not categorize people by European-American descent. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle "Arab descent is difficult to verify". Really? Is it difficult to verify that "a proud and unapologetic Arab American woman" such as Rashida Tlaib is Arab? Is it a mystery whether John Sununu ("I'm proud of my heritage as an Arab American") was an Arab? Is it a secret that Casey Kasem was proudly Arab? Arab Americans are a minority in the US; being an Arab American is not at all the same as being a European-American. "Arab American" is a real minority identity in the US, and not all Arab Americans identify with Orientalist terminology like "Middle Eastern". Unlike other minorities like Native Americans or Jewish Americans or African Americans, who do have categories, all the Arab categories are being deleted lest a few people from the Arab world be from non-Arab backgrounds. The categories weren't even sorted, so someone like Rashida Tlaib wasn't placed into the category for Category:American politicians of Arab descent. The category was simply deleted. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 11:48, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The proper analogy is between people of Arab descent in the United States and people of European-American descent in Australia. We are talking about people who descend from ancestors who were in the majority in another part of the world. Another example is people of Han Chinese descent in Germany, which we do not do either. In most cases we just have the ancestor's nationality anyway, Egyptian or Lebanese or whatever. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      There's a vast body of literature and research about "Arab Americans". There are numerous organizations, events, celebrations, and so forth that are explicitly Arab-American. Multiple state Democratic parties have an Arab caucus. There's no such parallel with "Han Americans". That comparison makes no sense. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 12:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • That just proves that there is sufficient content for the topic Arab American. It does not prove that someone of Lebanese descent is automatically also of Arab descent. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:52, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      We must immediately purge and delete all of the Hispanic/Latino categories. Category:American politicians of Mexican descent must be removed from its parent category, Category:Hispanic and Latino American politicians. Think about all those Nahuas and Oaxacans and Mormons and Plautdietsch-speaking Mennonites who might be miscategorized. Or do we only apply such micro-scrutiny to Arabs? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 13:04, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Bohemian Baltimore, Mexican is a nationality like Egyptian and Tusinian is a nationality. Arab is not. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Hispanic or Latino isn't a nationality either. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 01:02, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Bohemian Baltimore, neither is "Middle Eastern" or "North African" which is why those are container categories for countries in those regions like "Hispanic and Latino". Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Smasongarrison and Omnis Scientia: pinging contributors to previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:03, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Delete all per nom. "Middle Eastern" is more appropriate and inclusive than "Arab" and still includes Arab nationalities as well which are NOT being erased at all. The article "Arab Americans" also notes that people who are seen as "Arab Americans" may actually not be ethnically Arab but rather from Arab countries and of non-Arab ethnicity. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Omnis Scientia Not all Arab Americans are Middle Eastern, nor do all Arab Americans from Western Asia identify with Western-centric terms like "Middle Eastern". Arab-American is a legitimate identity and culture in the US. Nor does this argument explain why, say, individual Arab American politicians couldn't be placed into the category for American politicians of Arab descent, which was simply purged and deleted. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 11:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bohemian Baltimore, do you not think the "Arab world" is also a Western-centric phrase as well? Because "people of Arab descent" in these categories weren't necessarily ethnically Arab, they were from Arab countries. I think they would describe themselves as being from whichever country they came from. You gave the example of Rashida Tlaib. She calls herself "Palestinian American". Same is the case with Ilhan Omar who is "Somalian American". Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Omnis Scientia I can quite confidently assert that the Arab League is an Arab invention, not a Western invention. To be more specific than "Western-centric", the term is certainly Orientalist; east of what? As I previously asked, why were the categories deleted rather than individual verifiable Arabs placed into the categories? We don't delete all the Hispanic/Latino categories in the US because, well, maybe not everyone of Latin American origins self-identifies as Hispanic or Latino (maybe that person from Mexico identifies as an Aztec or a Russian Mennonite), and besides, Hispanics are the majority in Latin America anyway, so Hispanics aren't really a minority group in the US. Only Arabs seem to earn this sort of pedantry. I don't see anyone nominating Category:Hispanic and Latino American politicians for deletion lest we possibly offend Plautdietsch or Kʼicheʼ sensibilities. Arab American identity exists and is socially and politically relevant in the US, regardless of how others may feel. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 12:53, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bohemian Baltimore, we aren't deleting that because "Hispanic and Latino" is a container for Latin and Hispanic American countries like "Middle Eastern" and "North African" is to Arab nations. Also why do you think Latin Americans aren't a minority in the United States? An odd thing to say. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Read it again. Arabs and Latinos are both minorities in the US. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 13:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Hispanic and Latino Americans" are a container group for people from Latin American countries just like "Middle Eastern Americans" are a container group for people from Middle Eastern countries. Stop engaging in such bad faith arguments. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:10, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Omnis Scientia Please, Wikipedia:Assume good faith. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 03:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bohemian Baltimore, I did and I still am - I understand where you're coming from as well. I just feel your "Let's delete Latino categories" argument is not in good faith. Its not the point of what we're discussing here. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:09, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not to mention they are two different groups of people with two different types of history so your example amounts to false equivalence. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:00, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And the rest of what I said? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 13:08, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Central African Republic people[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 23#Category:Central African Republic people

Category:Caucasus Jews[edit]

Nominator's rationale: There are two Jewish ethnic groups originating from the Caucasus region: Mountain Jews and Georgian Jews. The term Caucasus Jews currently redirects to "Mountain Jews." These two groups are culturally distinct; they speak different languages and have many differences in customs and culture. However, other Jewish communities have also resided and continue to reside in the Caucasus region, including primarily Ashkenazi Jews, as well as some Sephardic and Bukharan Jews. Therefore, this category does not make sense. Currently, this category encompasses Jews from three modern countries, yet "Caucasus Jews" redirects to "Mountain Jews." Note: I have just separated the entries for category:Jews from Georgia (country) and category:Georgian Jews. Aldij (talk) 11:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 14:47, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The category is fine. I would also be okay with it being named something like Category:Jews in the Caucasus or "from the Caucasus", which would include subcategories for Armenian Jews, Azerbaijani Jews, Georgian Jews, Mountain Jews, and Jews from the Caucasian parts of Russia. The parent category for this should be Category:Jews and Judaism in the Caucasus, along the lines of Category:Islam in the Caucasus. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 13:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:British people of Tajik descent[edit]

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) Qwerfjkltalk 19:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 1 article category Gjs238 (talk) 12:51, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 14:47, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/delete. Being "Clearly part of a detailed and comprehensive category tree". is not a sufficiently good reason to keep a category. It rewards categories that are old, rather than categories that are useful. Mason (talk) 12:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/delete: 1-article category Gjs238 (talk) 14:11, 16 May 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:Canadian people of Tajik descent[edit]

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) Qwerfjkltalk 19:20, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 1 article category Gjs238 (talk) 12:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Clearly part of a detailed and comprehensive category tree. No purpose whatsoever served by deletion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:06, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge or delete, the category does not contain any biography. The topic article is already in Category:Asian diaspora in Canada where it properly belongs. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:45, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 14:47, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/delete. Being "Clearly part of a detailed and comprehensive category tree". is not a sufficiently good reason to keep a category. It rewards categories that are old, rather than categories that are useful. Mason (talk) 12:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/delete: 1-article category Gjs238 (talk) 14:11, 16 May 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 of West Asian descent[edit]

Nominator's rationale: This category tree is not needed. Western Asia is often conflated with the Middle East. Western Asia includes the South Caucasus but does not include Egypt (outside the Sinai Peninsula) and Turkish Thrace (geographically in Southeast Europe). Now "West Asian descent" categories merely serve as containers for "Middle East descent" and "Caucasus descent." However, these classifications are not entirely accurate. The term "People of Middle East descent" includes individuals from the African part of Egypt and Turkish Thrace in Europe, while "People of Caucasus descent" encompasses individuals from the North Caucasus in Europe. Aldij (talk) 09:55, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Asian parent categories. I agree that West Asia and Middle East are largely overlapping and we do not need both. However, it does not make sense to remove the content from the Asian tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree, merge to Asian parent categories is better. Aldij (talk) 14:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Merging to Asian parent categories is my second choice per Marco. NLeeuw (talk) 21:18, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment First, Category:Canadian people of West Asian descent has been emptied. Secondly, if we have categories for South Asia and Southeast Asia, wouldn't it make more sense to keep West Asia and dump the "Middle East" categories instead? They both are a little imprecise but what would make more sense fitting in with the existing geographic categorization? Liz Read! Talk! 19:39, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it would be better to merge the category trees of South Asia and Southeast Asia into Asia as well. I will nominate them separately now. Regarding the decision to discard the "Middle East" categories, I'm not certain there is consensus for this, nor am I sure whether I will personally support it. However, perhaps they need to be deleted as well. Aldij (talk) 15:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 14:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aldij, I would oppose deletion of "South Asia" categories since that is the region's name. "West Asia" is covered by the "Middle East". Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


IIHF Ice Hockey Women's World Championships[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 19:18, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Harmonizing subcategory names in the Category:IIHF Ice Hockey Women's World Championship. Please see also the previous discussion here. Maiō T. (talk) 17:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The nomenclature aligns with the official name of the tournament as used by the IIHF. Spitzmauskc (talk) 15:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The naming is unnecessarily redundant. The proposal is equivalent to "1999 International Ice Hockey Federation Ice Hockey Women's World Championships". What logical reason is there to say ice hockey twice? Seems like the parent category should be discussed, not the children. Flibirigit (talk) 11:15, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The IIHF uses "IIHF Ice Hockey Women's World Championship" on all official documentation. I suspect the inclusion of 'Ice Hockey' has its roots in the period during which the IIHF also organized the IIHF Inline Hockey World Championship. While I don’t disagree that the name may read as redundant, I do see value in maintaining the official name and feel the inclusion of 'Ice Hockey' is a helpful indicator for readers who may not be familiar with the IIHF acronym. Spitzmauskc (talk) 19:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I've tagged all of the categories and notified the creators.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:22, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 14:44, 15 May 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:Arab diaspora in the Middle East[edit]

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) Qwerfjkltalk 19:18, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not all individuals from countries such as Egypt, Iraq, Palestine, Syria, and Lebanon self-identify as Arabs. Therefore, this categorization may be misleading and fail to accurately reflect the diverse ethnic and national identities of people from these regions. Additionally, the term "diaspora" refers to a community of people who live outside their place of origin or ancestry. However, since Arabs are indigenous to the Middle East, the use of "diaspora" in this context can be confusing and inaccurate. Aldij (talk) 09:45, 15 May 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:Mexican people of Arab descent[edit]

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) Qwerfjkltalk 19:18, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Small category, I propose to upmerge into category:Mexican people of Middle Eastern descent. Aldij (talk) 09:19, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom, and it is not even sure if these people are of Arab descent. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:04, 15 May 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:Shiromani Akali Dal (Amritsar)[edit]

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: soft delete. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 19:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, only contains the eponymous article and a subcategory. The subcategory suffices. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:41, 15 May 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:Fiddlers from Sweden[edit]

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) Qwerfjkltalk 19:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I think these categories should be merged because frankly it's confusing to have two swedish categories Mason (talk) 04:55, 15 May 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.

Rename of Alien invasions in media et al.[edit]

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 all. @Zxcvbnm, feel free to nominate the "Alien visitations" categories for merging. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 19:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename per several past renames, in order to make it clear that these categories are for media that are about alien invasions and such, not where such things make potentially trivial appearances. DonIago (talk) 02:31, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Surely we dont want [Category:Alien visitations in fiction] be populated with novels where, like, "Hey Bob, Pete says he was visited by aliens. He must be drinking" - Altenmann >talk
  • Rename, stressing that it should be a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all except "alien visitations", which should be upmerged as overly vague - alien visitation is a disambiguation page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:13, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Trivial examples can already be removed with the current names and related guidelines. Cambalachero (talk) 12:57, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see how this is an argument against renaming the categories? This discussion is consistent with multiple recent category renamings as noted in the rationale. A few of them: [3], [4], [5], [6]. DonIago (talk) 13:32, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Rename all, and I agree with DonIago's comment about how purging doesn't address the question at hand. Mason (talk) 12:55, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename all in line with numerous precedents, like that time I launched around 14 bulk nominations of this type. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:27, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    14 is pretty impressive, though I'd say 29 is more impressive. Not that it's a competition. ;p DonIago (talk) 13:14, 17 May 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:Comic book editors[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 23#Category:Comic book editors

Category:Franz von Sickingen[edit]

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) Qwerfjkltalk 15:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category only contains the Franz von Sickingen, who was a leader of the Knights' War and the category of the conflict. I think that they should either be merged or this category should be deleted. It really doesn't help navigation. Mason (talk) 00:59, 15 May 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.


May 14[edit]

Category:Soda Den games[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I am not sure if categories with a single page (or less than a few) is allowed. Therefore, I am bringing this to discussion. I am putting Category:Amstrad video games and Category:BlankMediaGames games for the same reason, since Twinkle (the userscript) doesn't me do that. JuniperChill (talk) 21:57, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to mention 'Category:BlankMediaGames games' and one other but for some reason, it isn't appearing. JuniperChill (talk) 21:59, 14 May 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:Art festivals in the United States[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 21:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The name is too similar to Category:Arts festivals in the United States, creating confusion about which articles and categories belong in which. Vegantics (talk) 17:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose -- Upon further research I now understand that this is a (admittedly confusing) standard across Wikipedia. I'm not sure if I can retract a discussion but no longer feel the discussion is needed. Vegantics (talk) 18:03, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vegantics As nominator, you can vote Withdraw, as long as nobody has given a vote in support of your proposal. Then the discussion will be speedily closed. :) NLeeuw (talk) 18:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! I appreciate your help. Vegantics (talk) 18:33, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question Seems okay, but we don't have any Category:Visual arts festivals cat (tree) yet. Does it overlap with Category:Visual arts competitions, Category:Visual arts conferences and/or Category:Visual arts exhibitions? The latter has Category:Art festivals as a child, so that seems to be an apt parent. On the other hand, do all current items in Category:Art festivals in the United States fit the "visual arts" domain? Category:Arts festivals by type suggests a lot of other domains. If you could answer those questions, we might have a better idea what you are proposing. NLeeuw (talk) 18:01, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I appreciate the questions. In reviewing Category:Art festivals in the United States, which is described as intended for "festivals focused on the visual arts," I noticed some articles which do not seem applicable. I suspect this is because editors made the same mistake that I did of confusing it with Category:Arts festivals in the United States. However I now realize that this is a bigger standard across Wikipedia and would require a much larger, more extensive discussion. Vegantics (talk) 18:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're welcome. Would you like to start somewhere else, or could we use this case as an example to set a precedent for future discussions? I should add I've never been to the United States and visuals arts are quite outside my area of expertise (hence the questions for clarification), but I would like to help you out in finding the best way of categorising all these articles. Personally, I find the current category tree quite confusing, so it's a good idea to discuss how we could improve it. NLeeuw (talk) 18:19, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it does need to be addressed, but I want to do some additional research into how extensive this is and how much renaming would be required. I'm not equipped to lead such a discussion and would rather drop it for the time being. Vegantics (talk) 18:22, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's okay. As I said above, you can vote to Withdraw your own proposal. Take your time to your time to work out what you would like to discuss, and then come back some time with a new proposal. Good luck! NLeeuw (talk) 18:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw Upon further research I now understand that this is a (admittedly confusing) standard across Wikipedia. Vegantics (talk) 18:34, 14 May 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:United States politicians killed during the Civil War[edit]

Nominator's rationale: per article title American Civil War. This was opposed for speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy discussion

@AHI-3000 and Ymblanter: pinging contributors to speedy discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:48, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support per nom, but I need clarifications first: why is "United States" proposed to be omitted? So that it could also include Confederate politicians and perhaps foreign politicians who somehow got killed in the ACW? That would mean it no longer fits in the Category:20th-century American politicians (should be Category:19th-century American politicians), and more broadly the Category:American people tree, since Confederates and foreigners were arguably not "United States citizens" for the duration of the ACW (at least from the Confederate POV). In fact, I see the category currently already contains Confederate politicians, so removing "United States" is a good idea, but then we should remove Category:20th-century American politicians as a parent. But that may be a bit too legally speaking on my part . NLeeuw (talk) 18:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Zzap!64 Gold Medal Award winners[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 11:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A category for winners of "Gold Medal", awarded by a video game magazine. No article on it. See also this discussion. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 04:16, 14 May 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:UCLA Department of Earth Planetary and Space Sciences alumni[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Degrees from a school within a university may be defining, a degree from a specific department isn't typically defining. See for a similar case Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_September_23#Category:Harvard_University_Department_of_Psychology_alumni Mason (talk) 04:15, 14 May 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:Ship names with ukrainian origin[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 11:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:TRIVIALCAT. Mellk (talk) 03:15, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:01, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. (But if kept, it should be renamed to "Ukrainian")Mason (talk) 04:16, 14 May 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:Paintings of Hebrew Bible themes[edit]

Nominator's rationale: merge, a split between Hebrew Bible and Old Testament does not make too much sense in biblical art which largely originates from Christianity. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reverse merge, Hebrew Bible is the main tree here. NLeeuw (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is not a "main" tree per se. Old Testament is different (order of bible books), broader (with deuterocanonical books) and more applicable to topics that are more exclusively associated with Christianity. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:58, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Whether deuterocanonical books are included depends entirely on denomination. "Hebrew Bible" is the name for the 39 books common to Judaism and Christianity, and I see no reason why Christianity should be regarded as more important.
    On second thought, it might be better to upmerge Category:Paintings based on the Old Testament to its parents, as it is currently a mostly redundant layer. How does that sound? NLeeuw (talk) 22:19, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Re "Whether deuterocanonical books are included depends entirely on denomination", as things stand the "deuterocanonical books" category is within the "Old Testament" one, so isn't this an argument against the status quo as well? But it's resolved if Category:Paintings based on the Old Testament is upmerged to its parents, leaving the subdivisions of the (Christian) Bible as "Hebrew Bible", "deuterocanonical books" and "New Testament" – with no "Old Testament"? I hope I've got that right. Ham II (talk) 16:50, 7 May 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) 01:50, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tokyo Musashino United FC[edit]

Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEPON * Pppery * it has begun... 00:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:05, 6 May 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) 01:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • That ping was munged so I didn't get it, but I have no objection to keeping and renaming now. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Architects[edit]

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/rename as nominated. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:31, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:OCEPON. These categories only contain an eponymous article and a subcategory, so having the subcategory suffices. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:46, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Mason (talk) 01:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As this is a larger nomination, giving an extra week for objections.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:07, 14 May 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:Ossetian male writers[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge * Pppery * it has begun... 01:28, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. Non-defining intersection between ethnicity, occupation, and gender. Mason (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose; we already have similar categories of ethnciity/occuptation/gender, such as Category:African-American male writers, Category:Yoruba women writers, and Category:Basque women writers. Categorizing writers by gender and nationality is quite common as well; see Category:Male writers by nationality. ForsythiaJo (talk) 17:32, 28 April 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) 23:54, 6 May 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) 00:56, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge per nom and Marco. EGRS is not a WP:OTHERCATSEXIST thing: we need to know that being male, ossetian, and a writer is a defining intersection. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 11:43, 21 May 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.


May 13[edit]

California articles missing geocoordinate data[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There's no longer a need for these by-county maintenance categories. They were created 15 years ago when the backlog was much larger and separating by county was useful. The backlog has been greatly reduced; at the moment, every one of these categories is empty. (Special thanks to User:Oona Wikiwalker who has added a lot of coordinates recently.) The rate of new California-related articles is low enough that the statewide category is sufficient. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon me, but where have the remaining articles been moved to? I can't seem to find them.
And thank you for the kind words!Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 21:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oona Wikiwalker: I removed the last remaining articles today by adding coordinates to some and removing the others that didn't need coordinates. There are currently no California-related articles that have been tagged as needing coordinates. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How do you determine which articles don't need coordinates? I suspect I've wasted a lot of effort on pages that didn't need coordinates... Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 03:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Some US counties are very small in area or population. For example, the category tree for Alpine County, California, has only 194 articles according to Petscan — this county has only about 1,000 people and is smaller in area than most counties in Texas. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:27, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per nomination, although if these are now empty categories wouldn't CSD C1 have been quicker and more apporpriate? Adam Black talk • contributions 22:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Adam Black GB: The guidelines for C1 seem to exclude occasionally-empty maintenance categories; this is a somewhat uncommon case of those categories no longer being needed. I figured it was better to bring to CfD than risk confusion with CSD. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, I see. From my reading of it I thought C1 could be used if the maintenance category templates weren't on the page. Adam Black talk • contributions 22:37, 14 May 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:Trinitrotoluene[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category name should be consistent with the title of the article TNT. HertzDonuts (talk) 17:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, as there are lots of meanings. Unlike articles, where it's easy to find and correct mislinking ("TNT" but not the chemical meaning), cats are less well patrolled, harder to notice, and and create more problems when mis-set. In fact, the original Category:TNT was about the Russian TV channel even though the the chemical article was already at TNT. WP:MOSCAT notes:
"Avoid abbreviations. Example: "Category:Military equipment of World War II", not "Category:Military equipment of WW2". However, acronyms that have become the official, or generally used, name (such as NATO) should be used where there are no other conflicts."
and in this case the name is not "official", just COMMONNAME and there is a conflict. I have no objection to {{Category disambiguation}} or similar solution (I see that Category:Disambiguation categories does have other entries where the eponymous page is a redirect to a better-named article). DMacks (talk) 19:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals notified of this discussion. DMacks (talk) 19:54, 13 May 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:American communists of the Stalin era[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:ARBITRARYCAT. Communists in the United States are not necessarily defined by the leader of another country. User:Namiba 17:03, 13 May 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.

Newspapers published in Western Australia by region[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 21#Newspapers published in Western Australia by region

Category:Ernest Cline[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary layer of categorization. The "works by" category suffices as a top level parent category. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 15:51, 13 May 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:Electoral reform in Jersey[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No need to differentiate the electoral reform referendums from the others. At the very least, have it nested under the referendums in jersey category rather its own separate category alongside it. Saltywalrusprkl (talk) 14:51, 13 May 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:Yoruba police officers[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCEGRS. There are MANY Yoruba occupation categories which could also be nominated. Moreover, many of the people in these categories are put their because of their name, not because sources say that they are Yoruba. User:Namiba 14:10, 13 May 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:Beringia[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 01:10, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, anachronistic content, Beringia is a concept from prehistoric geography, but the category only contains current-day geography. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:51, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Marcocapelle's definition contradicts the maim article Beringia, which defines it as a current region. Dimadick (talk) 18:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It does not. It was one coherent region because the Bering Street was dry land. That is no longer the case. Beringia is not usually on any current-day map. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:19, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose per Dimadick. Nom seems to ignore the fact that the English term Beringia is also used for a present-day region. That it doesn't usually appear on present-day maps is an argument from anecdotal evidence. If nom could demonstrate that the category arbitrarily mixes up past and present in a confusing manner, that would be interesting to consider for a renaming or split, or something. NLeeuw (talk) 11:39, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Except a spurious touristic source, all sources referenced to are related to prehistory. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:22, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmmm... wait, I may have judged too soon. NLeeuw (talk) 22:01, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. That one source, https://www.nps.gov/subjects/beringia/index.htm, claiming that Beringia still exists today, evidently represents a fringe view not supported by the first 10 other sources I checked. All other language versions also support the idea that it is a region which no longer exists, and equivalent to "Bering Land Bridge". So let's remove that spurious source, and delete the whole category that has nothing to do with the geological, geographical and human migratory aspect of Beringia. NLeeuw (talk) 22:11, 4 May 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) 13:48, 13 May 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:Battles involving Bengal[edit]

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 per Fayenatic london, as unopposed. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, battles are diffused by (former) countries and Bengal was not a country. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok that is a reasonable alternative, but then still the content should be added to Category:Battles involving the Indian kingdoms too. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Marcocapelle: it should only be a selective merge to that parent, because many of the articles are already in other subcats of that one, and I'm not sure whether the others belong there. I suggest you watch the category and merge any valid missing items yourself if the rename goes through. – Fayenatic London 15:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Input in general would be great, but in particular input on FL's proposal would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 15:17, 3 May 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) 13:47, 13 May 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:Pocatello Army Air Base Bombardiers football seasons[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Only one page in category. Let'srun (talk) 16:36, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; standard cat scheme. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Saying something is standard, so we should keep it, is not a compelling reason. Having only one category is not helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 23:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is. Parallelism matters and should be considered a central pillar of Wikipedia. If this cat merged as nominated, then 1943 Pocatello Army Air Base Bombardiers football team is lost from the tree at Category:College football seasons by team. User:Let'srun's notations here are becoming tiresome and obstructive. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:21, 3 May 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) 13:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Catholic bishops in Macau[edit]

Nominator's rationale: merge, per article List of bishops of Macau, Catholic bishops are primarily bishop of a diocese. This is follow-up on Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_16#Category:16th-century_Roman_Catholic_bishops_in_Portuguese_Macau. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:43, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Although I'm on the fence about merging to Category:FOO-century Macau people, because not everyone is from Macau. Mason (talk) 16:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This category tree is now a big mess.  · There were Catholic bishops who were appointed bishops or titular bishops elsewhere but stationed in Macau, some of them as coadjutor/auxiliary bishops or administrators or governors of this diocese. These bishops were not bearers of the title Bishop of Macau although they were bishops who worked in Macau. Further the diocese covered a much much larger area in the Far East. It's only since the 1950s (or the 1980s if the two parishes in Malacca Malaysia and Singapore are taken into consideration) the Diocese of Macau is coterminous with the present-day territorial extent of Macau. From its founding in the 16th century hundreds of dioceses have been carved out from this diocese. The first proposal regarding Category:Roman Catholic bishops in Macau is therefore opposed.  · Likewise the second and the third proposals for the 19th and 20th century categories are opposed for the reasons as stated above, and that this is also a vote for the restoration of the 16th to 18th century categories. If the 19th and the 20th century categories (and the 16th to 18th century categories as well) were to be merged the target should be Portugal since the territory was over the period a Portuguese province (save for the last twelve days of the 20th century).  · For the fourth proposal on the 21st century category, bear in mind that the bishop does not participate in any conference of bishops or anything similar of the Chinese catholic church, and that the present bishop is not a native of Macau – There is no point to proceed as proposed.  · Overall this is a keep vote (and a vote to clear the mess under the preexisting structure prior to CfD 16 April). 58.152.55.172 (talk) 12:21, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: To the closer, this IP is WP:HKGW and has been the one making a mess of this and other similar categories. Mason (talk) 01:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This user labelled me as such with no explanation and I simply don't understand why she gave me such a label. It appears she just labels when she's running out of supporting arguments. I took no part in making this mess. The categories nominated in this CfD or the 16 April one were created by other editors, and I'd done nothing to change them. 58.152.55.172 (talk) 09:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • By all means purge bishops who were appointed bishops or titular bishops elsewhere, but stationed in Macau. If the tree is a mess we simply should have a clean-up. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:27, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as part of a larger categorisation scheme. Moving articles from categories of dependencies to those of the sovereign powers is not uncontested. 42.200.80.48 (talk) 12:44, 3 May 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) 13:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional animals by taxon[edit]

Nominator's rationale: No reason has been given why this unnecessarily WP:NARROWCAT has been created. It only contains two taxons which is not enough to justify an entire separate category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Category:Fictional animals by taxon, but merge Category:Fictional invertebrates and Category:Fictional vertebrates into Category:Fictional animals by taxon. AHI-3000 (talk) 05:08, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ultimately doing that is just shuffling around deck chairs and makes no real difference. But I think the more longstanding categories (since 2006) should take precedence over your new 2024 category, not things be merged just because you want your category to be prominent. You have just stated an opinion but not provided a reason to back why taxon is better than the vertebrate/invertebrate split. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zxcvbnm: My suggestion is to leave "Fictional animals by taxon" with 8 subcategories instead of 2, if your only argument is that it's too small right now. AHI-3000 (talk) 21:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both the nominated and the alt proposal could be an improvement, but I prefer the alternative, in order to keep taxa together as a recognizable attrribute. I have tagged the two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle: So do you support my suggestion? AHI-3000 (talk) 21:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:53, 5 May 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) 13:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge as originally nominated. The alt proposal is no good because it would leave the articles directly in Category:Fictional invertebrates orphaned and I see no reason true taxonomic category need to be categorized separately from folk taxonomic ones. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jewish communities destroyed in the Holocaust[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:57, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Disclaimer: I would like to say that this is a sensitive topic that should not be treated lightly. I am going to make some observations that seek to address what I see as inappropriate categorisation practices, but I thereby do not seek to deny or diminish or trivialise the severity of The Holocaust. That said: I think this is an WP:ARBITRARYCAT that should be listified, and every entry supported by WP:RS.
Detailed explanation
Firstly: We cannot say that a city or town, which had at some point a "Jewish community" (something which should also be properly defined first in terms of numbers and characteristics) living in it, should in its entirety be included in this category. The precedent Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 27#Category:Hungarian communities in Slovakia comes to mind: a minority community within a populated place or administrative region cannot be WP:DEFINING for the identity of that place or region as a whole. This is a wider issue within the Category:Historic Jewish communities in Europe tree, but also in similar category trees of "communities" that categorise entire places or regions based on a minority of ethnic group X living within its borders.
Secondly, what exactly "destroyed" means is also not clear, as there have also been many Holocaust survivors. Is a "community" only destroyed when 100% of its members did not survive the Holocaust, or is 90% enough? I'm sorry if that seems like a strange or inappropriate question, but it is one we need to ask to avoid having arbitrary percentages, and thus WP:ARBITRARYCATs. It is the same reason why we can't have Category:Fooian-speaking countries just because, say, more than 50% of inhabitants in country X speaks Fooian, because '50%' is arbitrary. (So I had those categories all renamed last year as well).
What "destroyed" means exactly may also vary. A few years ago, there was a long dispute on Dutch Wikipedia about "List of castles destroyed by the French during the Franco-Dutch War" (it had many different titles, all of which were quite arbitrary and untenable; link: nl:Wikipedia:Te beoordelen pagina's/Toegevoegd 20201103#Lijst van kastelen in Nederland, die door de Fransen rond 1672 of 1794 verwoest zijn). There, it turned out that some castles were rather "damaged" than "destroyed", or "demolished" outside of combat, and that a lot of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH was involved in developing the list. Like this category, that list mostly sought to highlight and quantify the extent of the destruction wrought by a group of perpetrators, but failed to properly define what it was exactly about. "Community" is an even vaguer concept than "castle", and how one can "destroy a community" is really a question I would rather like to leave up to sociologists than us category Wikipedians.
If we listify this category, we could at least provide reliable sources in which scholars explain what they mean; categories cannot do that for us. NLeeuw (talk) 17:10, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, the category contains articles about current-day European cities and towns rather than articles about pre-1945 Jewish communities. No objection against listification per se, but I think this task is far too big for someone to start with on a short term. The category content may be listed at the talk page of a relevant WikiProject before deletion, for someone, or maybe for multiple editors together, to start listifying in their own pace. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That seems like a good idea. Perhaps the creator @Eladkarmel is willing to do so? NLeeuw (talk) 20:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete These populated places are not notable for being Jewish communities. Dimadick (talk) 19:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not enough commentary on the proposal to listify.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:41, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dimadick Do you support the proposal to listify before deleting? NLeeuw (talk) 18:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Only if there are enough independent sources for such a list. Dimadick (talk) 00:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect there are plenty of libraries full of sources writing about this. But as Marco said, documenting and verifying all that takes a lot of time, so it would probably be best to list the content on a relevant WikiProject talk page. I think the most appropriate would be Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history. NLeeuw (talk) 21:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will drop a note at WT:JH.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 13:26, 13 May 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:American buskers[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This was previously discussed and agreed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 January 31#Category:American buskers before it was suddenly moved back without any discussion. WP:ENGVAR allows us to use the American English term. Buskers is not a word generally used in the United States. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 18:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy rename in the spirit of WP:G4 but keep a redirect. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @QuietHere: as you listed this at WP:CFDS you might want to react as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As I noted when I nominated this for a speedy move in January (see here), the relevant parent category is Category:Buskers by nationality, in which all other entries use that same word. I don't think it makes sense for just one category out of the tree to use different terminology, so I am opposed to this proposal as is. However, I would not oppose renaming the whole tree (and every other relevant category in the greater Category:Buskers tree) based on this given "busking" and "busker" are both redirects to street performance, and I would think it best for all categories to match with that. Plus, I would imagine "street performer" to be a better known, more readily understood, term than "busker". If you wish to extend this proposal to the whole tree, then I will gladly change my vote, but as is I think matching category names is ideal regardless of what terminology is in use. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:11, 5 May 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) 13:20, 13 May 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.

Migrant to the Ottoman Empire people from British India[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 21#Migrant to the Ottoman Empire people from British India

Category:Military history of Lorraine[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:20, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, Lorraine is a defunct administrative division, meanwhile part of Grand Est. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support It's true that it is no longer an administrative division, but we've got lots of other "Military history of former country/province X" cats. But I suppose it's okay to merge if that makes navigation easier. NLeeuw (talk) 17:15, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Nederlandse Leeuw: if you know other "Military history of former province" categories let me know and I will nominate them too. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmmmm I suppose there aren't that many, actually. I expected to find them everywhere, but all I could find that semi-qualifies is Category:Military history of Savoy, Category:Military history of Baden etc. But those have arguably been independent countries at some point before becoming provinces of larger countries. If I do find others, I'll let you know or nominate them myself. At any rate, seems like your rationale is in line with common practice. NLeeuw (talk) 17:42, 15 May 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:New South Wales rugby union team players[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 21#Category:New South Wales rugby union team players

Category:Battles in Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: manual merge. (non-admin closure) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:31, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN and recent precedents. NLeeuw (talk) 06:33, 13 May 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:Battles in Grand Est[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: manual merge. (non-admin closure) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN and recent precedents. NLeeuw (talk) 06:31, 13 May 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:Kyrgyzstani politicians of Korean descent[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. there'd no need to diffuse Kyrgyzstani people of Korean descent by occupation. Mason (talk) 04:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per given reasoning. Also only one page in the politician cat 104.232.119.107 (talk) 07:24, 13 May 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:Jules Dassin[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary eponymous parent category for one subcategory of films. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 04:42, 13 May 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:Analysts of Ayodhya dispute[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 21#Category:Analysts of Ayodhya dispute

Category:Political linguistics[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge/delete. This category contains one page and a redirect, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 02:56, 13 May 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:Centro de Estudios Puertorriqueños faculty[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 21#Category:Centro de Estudios Puertorriqueños faculty

Category:NBA 2K players[edit]

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. Discussion about the categorization of Brent Petway can take place at Talk:Brent Petway. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one subject in category Let'srun (talk) 02:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not a defining characteristic. (If not deleted, merge per nom.) Marcocapelle (talk) 04:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Marco. Being in the video game is not defining for the sole member. Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:19th-century Canadian people (post-Confederation)[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between century and confederation status. There isn't a Canadian people (post-Confederation) category. Mason (talk) 00:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, the problem is rather in pre-Confederation Canada, when Canada did not yet exist and the term British North America is controversial. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Canada did not mean all of what you now know as Canada in that era, but it most certainly did exist. A person from the pre-1867 Province of Canada most certainly was a Canadian; a person from the pre-Durham provinces of Upper Canada and Lower Canada most certainly was a Canadian. Bearcat (talk) 22:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Which can be easily fixed by creating the more appropriate categories and moving those people to them, and doesn't require this. Until better categories for where they were really from actually exist, however, categorizing pre-confederation New Brunswickers or Newfoundlanders as "Canadian", while certainly not ideal, remains preferable to leaving them completely out of the entire tree. Bearcat (talk) 15:41, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. The question of whether a person died before or after 1867 isn't particularly relevant in this context; as I explained above, a person from Upper Canada/Canada West or Lower Canada/Canada East between 1791 and 1867 was still very much a Canadian. Bearcat (talk) 22:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you please convey that to the JPL? I've tried again on his talk page, and there's just no reasoning with him.Mason (talk) 03:48, 20 May 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:Fran Saleški Finžgar[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. This entire category tree only has two pages in it: the author and one novel they work, which isn't helpful for navigation. (Notably it has just as many categories as pages). Mason (talk) 00:22, 13 May 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:Fran Levstik[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:14, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. This category only has two pages in it, the author and the list of their works. That's not helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 00:20, 13 May 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:Fujiwara no Shunzei[edit]

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) Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:14, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This category only has two pages in it. One of which is the author's work and the other is the author. That's not helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 00:17, 13 May 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.


May 12[edit]

Category:Canadian military personnel from Kelowna[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge * Pppery * it has begun... 01:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization by location. While a few Canadian cities do have "Military personnel from City" categories (but not "Canadian military personnel from City"), there's no comprehensive scheme in place of doing this across the board for all cities — they otherwise exist only for the major megacities with populations of half a million or more, whose base "People from City" categories were overpopulated into the hundreds or thousands and needed diffusion for size control, and not for every city across the board. But with just 67 articles in Category:Canadian military personnel from British Columbia and just six in Category:People from Kelowna, neither of the parent categories are large enough to need this for diffusability. There's no particularly unique relationship between military service and being from Kelowna per se, so this isn't needed for just three people if other Canadian cities in Kelowna's weight class (Lethbridge, Regina, Saskatoon, Thunder Bay, Sudbury, Gatineau, Sherbrooke, Moncton, etc.) don't have the same. Bearcat (talk) 14:51, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree Kelowna is the third largest locality in BC. Uncontroversial categories exist for the two largest localities (Vancouver and Victoria). It already has three entries which is often considered the criterion for a category, and is likely to gain more in the future as more biographies are created. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, the standard minimum size for a category is normally five, not three, and even then size alone doesn't automatically trump other considerations. A category that is failing or violating other rules isn't exempted from those other rules just because you can get its size to five per se.
Secondly, "(Canadian) military personnel" categories don't exist for either Vancouver or Victoria at all yet, so I don't know what you even think you're talking about with that argument.
Thirdly, it's not "ordinal size rank within province" that determines whether such a category is warranted in this tree, but "is the base people-from category large enough to need diffusion or not" — which with just six people in it now and only nine even if these get upmerged to it (well, actually eight, because one of these three people is already in a different occupational subcategory as it is), Kelowna's is not. At present, these categories exist only for big cities where an undifferentiated "People from" category without occupational subcategories would be populated past the 500-article or 1,000-article marks, which is not where Kelowna is sitting, and they do not automatically exist as a matter of course for every small or medium city that had one, two or three military people come from there.
My mistake on thinking there was a category for military personnel from Victoria and Vancouver. It is actually Category:Writers from British Columbia that includes those two cities, and now (since I created it) Kelowna. Which is a good reason to think maybe they should all be in a category, rather than ruling out Kelowna because the other two haven't been created yet.
I could add Trevor Cadieu from Vernon, which is on the same lake as Kelowna and with city limits separated by ~10 km, possibly considered a suburb. Also since this nom, I discovered that George Randolph Pearkes served with the BC Dragoons which is a Kelowna reserve unit (Okanagan Military Museum). I don't want to change the categories of either bio right now in case this is an error and would be perceived as gaming this nom. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Found one more notable definitely described as "from Kelowna" by Okanagan Military Museum: Rodney Frederick Leopold Keller. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The smallest other city with a sibling category is both (a) four times Kelowna's size, and (b) about 80 years older than Kelowna, both adding up to the fact it has several hundred more articles in its "People from" tree than Kelowna does, and thus needs to be diffused more than Kelowna's does. Bearcat (talk) 15:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 17:44, 23 April 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) 23:28, 12 May 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:LGBT-related music[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 11:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: An odd entry in Category:LGBT arts, because of the "-related" adjective not shared by any parent category (but shared by some subcategories that may need to be renamed as well). Sister categories at that level (in LGBT arts) are just LGBT dance, LGBT literature, LGBT arts organizations, LGBT theatre, and LGBT art‎. No "-related" anywhere there. Another option would be to rename everything to the form of 'X about Y", although I am not sure if "about LGBT" sounds best (ex. "Music about LGBT"?). For now, removing "-related" from that tree might be easiest in terms of standardization. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, I guess it is called "-related" because it also contains LGBT musicians and LGBT musical groups subcategories with artists who do not all create LGBT content. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I would note that the category is named the way it is because CFD previously renamed it from the proposed new name to the existing one on the grounds that the music itself doesn't have its own innate sexual orientation, but is merely contextually related to the sexual orientations of people. I would further note things like Category:LGBT-related films, Category:LGBT-related television shows and Category:LGBT-related books, which are also categorized as "LGBT-related", and not just as "LGBT", for the same reason, which means there's a mixture of "LGBT" vs. "LGBT-related" among its siblings rather than this being a one-off outlier. It's a complicated question, for sure, but the reason it's named this way is because of a prior CFD discussion on it, so it's not nearly as clearcut as the nominator makes it out to be. Bearcat (talk) 15:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Weak keep based on the names of the sibling categories that Bearcat mentions. Mason (talk) 03:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 17:23, 23 April 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) 23:27, 12 May 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:Songs against capitalism[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Generally, our songs by topic categories are 'about' not 'against'. Ex. Category:Songs about poverty. This is also subcat to Category:Songs about consumerism, not Category:Songs against consumerism... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lean to delete, it is quite a stretch to say that these songs are about capitalism. I found several that are just critical of modern society in general, some others about the labour movement. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:51, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps could be saved after pruning, if anyone can indeed show a song about capitalism. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. I can understand why one ould argue that should be deleted because of the nebulous nature, but it is pretty clear that many of these songs have lyrics that are anti-capitalist. Velociraptor888 (talk) 23:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, it is not clear at all. It relies very much on subjective judgement. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 17:22, 23 April 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) 23:27, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • That is not an improvement versus the current name. This proposed name suggests the songs are about an anti-capitalist movement while the intent of the category is to have songs that name and shame capitalism. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:27, 15 May 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:Nigerian books by year[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Also delete Category:2015 Nigerian books, Category:2017 Nigerian books

Contains two subcategories, each containing only 1 article. Gjs238 (talk) 22:45, 12 May 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.


Transport infrastructure by decade[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, very complicated tree for only a few subcategories about bridges, canals and lighthouses. Note that this nomination is not about these bridges, canals or lighthouses subcategories, but only about intermediate container categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:18, 12 May 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:Congenital amputees[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:52, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between specific disability and source of the disability. Mason (talk) 23:01, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding of the categorization rules (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization) is that categories that are relevant are based on what criteria are considered defining. I believe that congenital amputee status is considered a meaningful category in the emic (i.e., members) of the limb difference community. E.g., https://www.amputee-coalition.org/resources/amputations-in-childhood/ . This reflects the fact that the lived experience of those with congenital vs acquired amputations is often quite different (e.g., variation in phantom limb experience, the need to actively learn how to function without a limb from birth vs learning as an adult, the use of prosthetics vs not [prosthetics are less frequently used by those with congenital limb differences]). I am aware of this through my extensive involvement with the limb difference community. It can also be observed by a read of the discussions of amputees and those with limb differences (e.g., one of many examples here: https://www.reddit.com/r/amputee/comments/zl8rdk/looking_for_insight_into_child_amputee/).
Note also that there is a Wikipedia page for congenital amputees (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congenital_amputation) which per categorization rules is an important signal that a category is defining. Calculatedfire (talk) 23:31, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also meant to add- there is a precedence set for amputee categories based on the current categories presented (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Amputees). Certainly congenital amputees is just as or probably notably recognized as per current Wikipedia guidelines (e.g., having its own Wikipedia page) than other categories (e.g., there is no page German amputees; "Works about Amputees" is certainly not a defining characteristic of much of the included media. This is not to say that these other categories should be removed, but rather, to show that congenital meets the required threshold of defining. Calculatedfire (talk) 23:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I think you'll be able to make a more compelling case if you review WP:EGRS/D which gives clearer rules for intersections with disability and other characteristics (gender, race, sexuality etc). Could you show me where having a wikipedia page about a condition means that "per categorization rules is an important signal that a category is defining"? Because I don't think that is sufficient to have a wikipedia page to ensure that it could be a category. Mason (talk) 03:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lean to oppose, I may be mistaken but at first glance I don't think there is a trivial intersection at stake. Congenital amputation is being born without a limb, which is a "thing" in itself. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But is it defining for individuals? I'm open to having my mind changed, but I don't think people tend to have the lead of the article stating that they are a congenital amputee. If anything, the leads will be about amputees who acquired their disability through a headline grabbing fashion. Now, I'm well aware that there is literature on differences between acquired and congenital disabilities, and that has implications for interventions as well as well-being.
    However, I still don't think that "reliable sources [...] regularly describe the person as having th[e] characteristic". Fuller quote from Wikipedia:EGRS/D
    >"People with disabilities, intersex conditions, and other medical or psychological states or conditions, should not be added to subcategories of Category:People with disabilities, Category:Intersex people or Category:People by medical or psychological condition unless that condition is considered WP:DEFINING for that individual. For example, there may be people who have amnesia, but if reliable sources don't regularly describe the person as having that characteristic, they should not be added to the category."
    Mason (talk) 03:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, here I did some more research:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorizing_articles_about_people under "Specific Intersections":
    "At all times, the bottom line remains can a valid, encyclopedic main article be written for this grouping?"
    There is a main article on this subject as I noted in my original response.
    Thank you as I am learning to navigate this process. Calculatedfire (talk) 01:09, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose as constituted, though open to other alternatives if somebody's got a better idea. The distinction obviously hasn't been upheld all that well in the past, but today there is greater recognition than there used to be that there is a qualitative difference between being born with a congenital limb difference and the later loss due to injury or disease of a limb one previously had. It is, for example, one of the reasons why we moved Category:Amputee sportspeople to Category:Sportspeople with limb difference about a year and a half ago, so that the terminology was more inclusive. Medical literature is stricter on the distinction now than it used to be, referring to congenital limb difference rather than congenital amputation; people with congenital limb differences are more outspoken about the differences; even media try harder now to recognize and respect the distinction (even if they're not always perfect); and on and so forth. So really, we should either allow the category system to uphold the distinction, or pick an alternative term like "people with limb difference", instead of continuing to use "amputees", if consensus really wants to collapse it. Bearcat (talk) 23:52, 1 May 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) 17:58, 12 May 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:Buildings Downtown Portland, Oregon[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 25#Category:Buildings Downtown Portland, Oregon

Category:G13 eligible AfC submissions[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 20#Category:G13 eligible AfC submissions

15 to 21 days old[edit]

May 11[edit]

Category:MSI nettops[edit]

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:MSI computers and Category:Mini PC. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article in category. Upmerge to relevant categories. Gonnym (talk) 20:53, 11 May 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:Rihard Jakopič[edit]

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) Qwerfjkltalk 17:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now: This eponymous category only has the artist and a pavilion that is named after them. Such a category, with two pages is unhelpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 20:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now: categories like redirects are WP:CHEAP. Maybe the category will be populated in the future. Do you see no prospect for expansion of this right now unhelpful category? Awesome Aasim 21:21, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Jakopič is well known artist in Slovenia and in future the category will likely contain Slovenian streets named after him. Category is useful to me. A09|(talk) 12:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Articles about streets named after an artist do not belong in a category anyway, as these articles do not provide any information about the artist. The streets may be listed in the article about the artist though. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:OCEPON, and the two articles are already directly interlinked. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don't object to deletion of this category. It only contains two articles besides the eponymous one. If there are more articles created on the artist about some of his paintings (which are notable but I don't expect it will happen right away), the category may be recreated. Thanks for the notification. --TadejM my talk 22:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:OCEPON. I see zero policy/guideline-based reasoning to keep this category; just an WP:ITSUSEFUL and a "it might grow" (which was deprecated as a reason to keep a category in October). HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:54, 19 May 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:Coaches Kerala Cricket Team 2023[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:31, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: One-entry category for a non-defining characteristic. We do not exhaustively subcategorize cricket coaches for the individual year they worked, particularly given that sports teams normally only have one coach at any given time, and thus each category would have only one entry (or perhaps two if a coach got fired and replaced partway through the season, but never, ever enough to actually surpass minimum size requirements for categories). And even if this category were justified, this wouldn't be its correct name anyway. Bearcat (talk) 19:51, 11 May 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:Cartoonists by country templates[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Category:Cartoonists by country templates

Category:United States National Recording Registry albums[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The same rationale as last time: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 28#Category:United States National Recording Registry albums. I still see no reason for this category to be active and it is still redudant to Category:United States National Recording Registry recordings. Even if all the album articles were listed under the United States National Recording Registry albums category, that would just leave songs and other miscellaneous records under the United States National Recording Registry recordings category. It is really a crime to have all the inducted recordings under one category? QuasyBoy (talk) 18:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good point Espngeek (talk) 18:58, 24 April 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) 13:24, 3 May 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) 19:00, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep, otherwise upmerge per Marcocapelle. Like all participants in these two CfDs, I'm not clear what the issue is. Not all recordings are albums, so there isn't an obvious redundancy here. But like the sole participant in the previous CfD, I'm not sure if these really make sense as categories rather than a list. -- Visviva (talk) 02:13, 12 May 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 universities and colleges of Jesuits[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Category:Former universities and colleges of Jesuits

Category:People of South Asian descent[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The boundaries of South Asia are not well-defined. Beyond the central regions of the Indian Empire, there is significant inconsistency in which additional countries are considered part of South Asia. Clear demarcations—whether geographical, geopolitical, socio-cultural, economic, or historical—between South Asia and other Asian regions are lacking. Aldij (talk) 16:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose: Asia is a huge continent. I see this as creating more confusion when making categories than having them separate. The geographical boundaries can be debated but it does not change that some reliable sources including sources close to the author refer to the subject as of "South Asian" descent. Awesome Aasim 21:23, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, in the history tree for before 1947, the term "India" is mostly used to encompass the current territory of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. "South Asia" might be a better alternative than "India". Marcocapelle (talk) 03:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Regardless of the variability in definition of "South Asia" in the real world, Wikipedia has solved the problem for its own purposes. We have numerous articles and categories relating to "South Asia". The 8 countries we include are listed at South Asia. It is untrue that we lack a clear demarcation. To help with the issue of users not being aware of which countries are covered, we could copy and paste the list of 8 countries into the top of each category listed above. If there is a valid rationale for merging, it's not the one presented above. Nurg (talk) 09:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikipedia intends to follow the real world, not to set its own standards. Of these 8 countries, Afghanistan is very questionable as it is often counted as part of Central Asia, but the other 7 are ok. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't have an opinion on whether Afghanistan should remain in South Asia or be moved to Central Asia. "Wikipedia has solved the problem for its own purposes" for now. It can change to a different definition of 'South Asia', but that's a separate debate and I probably wouldn't be interested enough in it to participate. But the nominator's rationale that the boundaries of South Asia are not well-defined is not true for our purposes. We have a very clear definition, albeit it is not immutable. Nurg (talk) 01:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless this is a proposal to upmerge all intermediate regional categories into Fooian people of Asian descent categories, for consistency. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I would oppose such a proposal as well because geography. South Asians are culturally and linguistically different from East Asians and Middle Eastern Asians. Distance does a lot to culture. Awesome Aasim 20:52, 12 May 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:Carib people[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Category:Carib people

Category:20th-century Algerian photographers[edit]

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:20th-century photographers. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:03, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge for now. This category is only has one person in it and doesn't help navigation. Mason (talk) 04:50, 11 May 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:Students in Mauritius[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge/delete as nominated. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one page in this category, which is unhelpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 01:54, 11 May 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.


May 10[edit]

Category:Random Pages Tests[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary Capitalization; Consistency With Wikipedia:Random pages test Queen of Hearts (talk) 23:49, 10 May 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:Drakengard[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 18#Category:Drakengard

Category:Rhino Records albums[edit]

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/rename as nominated. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rhino Records was renamed to Rhino Entertainment. Same company shouldn't have separate categories. Add all three renames to Category:Rhino Entertainment. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 20:16, 10 May 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:Gruppo API[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:10, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category contains 1 eponymous article and 1 redirect, which is targeted to the same eponymous article. Gjs238 (talk) 20:11, 10 May 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:Non-denominational[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:10, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OC/U#not-based * Pppery * it has begun... 18:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is not about the name, it is about the fact that Non-denominational is not a denomination. There are over 2000 other Wikipedians in Category:Christian Wikipedians who did not specify a denomination.Marcocapelle (talk) 05:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Only in the way that agnosticism is not a religion, non-binary is not a gender, and rejection of a sexual orientation label is not a sexual orientation. There is a difference between not specifying something and rejecting or not identifying with it (also non-denominational is not specific to Christianity). However, as the only editor in this category has been blocked, I no longer oppose deletion. Peter James (talk) 12:03, 14 May 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 educated at Alcester Grammar School[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Category:People educated at Alcester Grammar School

Category:People educated at De La Salle College Dundalk[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Category:People educated at De La Salle College Dundalk

Category:People educated at Coláiste an Phiarsaigh[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Category:People educated at Coláiste an Phiarsaigh

Category:Nance Family[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:10, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only three entries and no others to add. Not necessary to have a family category when this is the most there will ever be in it. SportsGuy789 (talk) 04:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, the articles are already directly interlinked in the body text of the articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:56, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 01:36, 16 May 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:14th-century French Sephardi Jews[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 3x upmerge for now. It's not helpful for navigation to diffuse 14th/13th century sephardi jews by nationality when theres only one or two people in the category Mason (talk) 01:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just delete, one article is about a Jew who wasn't of Spanish origin, the other about an ex-Jew who wasn't French. Generally the concept of French Sephardi Jews does not make much sense before 1492 (Alhambra Decree). Marcocapelle (talk) 03:52, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Marcocapelle. --Aldij (talk) 17:27, 17 May 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.


May 9[edit]

Category:Rebel princes[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Category:Rebel princes

Category:Beauty pageant contestants from Lagos[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: manual merge. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-notable intersection User:Namiba 19:29, 9 May 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:American Splendor artists[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Category:American Splendor artists

Category:Third-person view[edit]

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 for now, with no prejudice against recreating the category if more content is found (either under this name or a similar one). (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I've created this one few minutes ago, but maybe the name should be analogous to Category:First-person video games? Consider the existence of Category:First-person shooters and Category:Third-person shooters, with only the first having a parent category outside shooter games (until my creation). Both have main articles. However, third-person view has a redirect to an article section, while first-person view goes to a disambig, sigh. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Piotrus: what other content are you planning to add to this category? That will provide the answer to the question. If topic articles are going to be added then "view" seems the right name. If only video games are going to be added then "video games" is the obvious right name. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:10, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • If there isn't anything going to be added on a short term then the category might as well be deleted, because of lack of content. It can be recreated when it is more clear what sort of content there is. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:41, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete for now without prejudice per Marcocapelle. I can't think of anything else to add either. There are lots of other games that are third person, but that is either WP:NONDEFINING because virtually no other game of that genre (say, RPG, survival, puzzles etc.), uses first-person view, uses bird's eye view or isometric view (e.g. RTS games), or you can switch between first and third person (sometimes even second person). "Third-person shooter" is the only commonly used term in video gaming that I know of. NLeeuw (talk) 23:01, 9 May 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:Armenian screenwriters by century[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Category:Armenian screenwriters by century

Category:Nigerian gay writers[edit]

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: dual merge to Category:Nigerian LGBT writers as well as Category:Nigerian gay men and Category:Nigerian lesbians, respectively. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 or 2 articles, too small to aid navigation. All are already in the appropriate sub-categories. User:Namiba 15:53, 9 May 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:Populated places on the Underground Railroad[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Category:Populated places on the Underground Railroad

Caribbean people by descent‎[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 15:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename for consistency with their subcategories which are all "by descent", as well as for consistency with Category:North American people by descent at the top of the tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:09, 9 May 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:Extinct Indigenous peoples of Australia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Category:Extinct Indigenous peoples of Australia

Category:Religious buildings and structures destroyed in the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Category:Religious buildings and structures destroyed in the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent

Category:Conspiracist media[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Category:Conspiracist media

Category:Disinformation operations[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: purge (and reevaluate after purging). (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category contains medias that are mainstream, and most of these are from certain countries. Coddlebean (talk) 06:08, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don't feel qualified to be a great judge in the matter, but it does seem to be a bit of an WP:ARBITRARYCAT. Disinformation operations definitely exist, but what does that mean exactly for categorisation purposes? Sure, Category:Government spokespersons of Russia spread a lot of disinformation, no doubt about that; but does that make them "operations"? I don't think that makes grammatical sense. Perhaps this category just needs to be Purged? NLeeuw (talk) 06:41, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Purge, to begin with. There are nuanced differences between disinformation, misinformation, propaganda and fake news and this category contains all of that. As we have Category:Misinformation, Category:Fake news and Category:Propaganda as well, it would make sense to remove all articles and subcategories from Category:Disinformation operations if they are already in one of the three other trees. After that is done we may re-evaluate what to do with this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:11, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support purge Seems like a good approach to begin with. NLeeuw (talk) 23:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support purge and, as for the justification for this delete, these are not mainstream media; they are something else. Whether or not they are mostly from certain countries is beside the point; they are from wherever they are from. And whether or not they are even media is beside the point, since this category is about 'operations'. The same justification has been used into several deletion requests here. Hmains (talk) 19:03, 13 May 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:Hindu temples destroyed by Muslims[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Category:Hindu temples destroyed by Muslims

Category:Continental League contributors[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Category:Continental League contributors

Category:Continental League[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Category:Continental League

Category:Singles by decade by record label[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Category:Singles by decade by record label

Category:Philosophers of theodicy[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. I don't think we need to diffuse this category by the specific question in the philosophy of religion, especially since this cateogory only has one person it it. Mason (talk) 02:44, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, this doesn't seem to be a particularly useful subdivision of Category:Philosophers of religion. Psychastes (talk) 02:45, 9 May 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:Philosophers by ethnicity[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: per WP:OCEGRS, there doesn't seem to be a reason why philosophers should be categorized by ethnicity Psychastes (talk) 02:37, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. If not deleted, I think that Jewish philosophers‎ should be added to Category:Philosophers by ethnicity. Mason (talk) 13:41, 9 May 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.


May 8[edit]

Category:Early Germanic music[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 11:49, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now, there's not enough content to support a category right now. There's only one page in here (and Early Germanic music redirects to Early Germanic culture Mason (talk) 22:56, 8 May 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:Native Americans' rights activists[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:48, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename to make the distinction between being an activist who is of native american ancestry and someone who is in support of the rights of people who are of native american ancestry. This category is a siblings to Category:Activists for African-American civil rights‎ and Category:Activists for Hispanic and Latino American civil rights, which were renamed following this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_November_4#Category:African-Americans'_civil_rights_activists Mason (talk) 22:38, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
support per nom jengod (talk) 22:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 06:16, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 08:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. PersusjCP (talk) 15:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - seems reasonable. --ARoseWolf 12:09, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - per nom. Makes sense. Netherzone (talk) 00:26, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, but why not "civil rights" like the other categories? Marcocapelle (talk) 13:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I would think it's because not only does "Native American rights" encompass civil rights, but also treaty rights. PersusjCP (talk) 15:30, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also there are quite a few Native American environmental justice rights activists, too. Netherzone (talk) 00:23, 10 May 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:Albanian rights activists[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 16#Category:Albanian rights activists

Category:Lists of airports in Massachusetts[edit]

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:Lists of airports in the United States. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category. Let'srun (talk) 19:42, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Places" doesn't make sense. Up-merge to Airports in the United States and delete category all together. CaribDigita (talk) 21:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge to Category:Lists of airports in the United States for now without prejudice per CaribDigita. NLeeuw (talk) 06:18, 9 May 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:Heliports in Massachusetts[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Category:Heliports in Massachusetts

Category:Punjabi diaspora in Asia[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, not enough content for diffusion by continent. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:32, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge for now per nom. Normally a "by country" category is a containercat, but in this case it's not marked as such, and it would create an impractical situation if it were (as indicated by nom), so it's fine. NLeeuw (talk) 06:26, 9 May 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:Book of Joel people[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:52, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge delete, single-article categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Not every Hebrew Bible book must have its own people category per se. There is no need to merge to Category:Hebrew Bible people, the articles are already in Category:Prophets in the Hebrew Bible. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:18, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: do you mean "merge"? HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:45, 16 May 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:Tuvan independence activists[edit]

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:Tuvan people and Category:Independence activists. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 11:50, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Broaden this category so it can include other kinds of activists. Mason (talk) 04:22, 8 May 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.

People from Overseas France by ethnic or national origin[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:45, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename for consistency with their subcategories which are all "by descent", as well as for consistency with Category:French people by descent at the top of the tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:23, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom Mason (talk) 04:22, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 14:16, 8 May 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:Suicide books[edit]

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:Books about suicide. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:44, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge: These categories seem to be extremely overlapping Mason (talk) 02:16, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: @NLeeuw: @Mason: I want to take a moment to clarify the nature of the category we're discussing. It appears there might have been a misunderstanding, and I'd like to ensure we're on the same page. The category in question pertains to books on the topic of DIY suicide. These books delve into sensitive and potentially dangerous instructions related to suicide. As such, they carry a significant degree of risk and responsibility. It's important to recognize that their content can have serious implications for individuals who may be vulnerable or in distress. Given the sensitive nature of this subject matter, it's understandable that there may be concerns regarding the availability and promotion of such materials. Our intention is not to offend or upset, but rather to approach this topic with caution and consideration for the well-being of all individuals involved. I apologize if there was any confusion regarding the purpose or scope of this category. Geysirhead (talk) 06:06, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. NLeeuw (talk) 06:23, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Single merge to Category:Books about suicide; Category:Suicide methods does not seem to be an appropriate merge target. Perhaps keep a redirect. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:02, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Single merge per Marcocapelle. A book about suicide can be about a lot more than just the methods. Think about motives, underlying causes, social impact, prevention, statistics, cultural depictions and references, etc. NLeeuw (talk) 14:16, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Great points! Mason (talk) 22:34, 8 May 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:Georgetown College (Kentucky)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 15#Category:Georgetown College (Kentucky)


May 7[edit]

Category:Comic book editors[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 15#Category:Comic book editors

Category:Ethnic groups in the Arab world[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: split. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:20, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT, largely duplicative of Category:Ethnic groups in the Middle East (which actually has a proper, identically named main article: Ethnic groups in the Middle East) and Category:Ethnic groups in North Africa, with an unnecessary focus on "Arab" in the title instead of recognising the ethnic diversity of the region. NLeeuw (talk) 22:06, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, ethnic groups in the Middle East and in North Africa are unrelated to each other (except for Arabs of course). Marcocapelle (talk) 00:27, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, per nom. --Aldij (talk) 16:20, 11 May 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:Pornography in Australia[edit]

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/rename as in the updated nomination. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT. Exactly the same scope. Category:Pornography in Australia was created today; Category:Australian pornography in 2011, so the latter should be the merge target to preserve the edit history. However, for consistency per WP:C2C and per main article Pornography in Austria per WP:C2D, Pornography in Australia should be the catname once the merger has been completed. That will leave Category:Pornography in Oceania a redundant layer with 1 C 0 P, so it should be upmerged to its parents for now without prejudice per WP:MFN. NLeeuw (talk) 21:00, 7 May 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:IMAX venues in the United Kingdom[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:07, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category lacks subjects. Let'srun (talk) 20:37, 7 May 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:Communism in the Arab world[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:39, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:ARBITRARYCAT WP:OVERLAPCAT. All children are already in parents Category:Communism in Asia and Category:Communism in Asia (part of the Category:Political movements by continent tree), as well as Category:Communism by country). On the other hand, Category:Arab communists is in the Category:People by ethnicity and political orientation tree, which has been inappropriately intersected with the trees above. NLeeuw (talk) 06:02, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Added Conservatism and Monarchism which are very similar situations. Other siblings could be nominated as well, but I suggest we do them as follow-ups in order to not make this nomination overly complicated. NLeeuw (talk) 06:10, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:23, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose this ongoing process of dismantling Category:Arab world one layer at a time. The above participants have argued for retention of this hierarchy, so this group appear to be safe for now. If any further nominations are made, rather than deletion of Arab world categories, the nom should suggest replacing them by building out "in the Middle East" and "in North Africa" hierarchies, which have been the targets of some other former Arab world categories – like the Ethnic groups nomination above. Category:Politics of North Africa is currently rather thin. – Fayenatic London 10:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair points. I guess this nomination was malformed from the start. I'll withdraw and start over with a better proposal at some later stage. NLeeuw (talk) 10:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    PS: I'm not necessarily advocating for the entire dismantling of the Category:Arab world tree per se. I'm looking at all the branches to see if they make sense or not, and what alternatives there may be. Some categories appear more justifiable than others. NLeeuw (talk) 10:32, 10 May 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.

Punjabi people by occupation[edit]

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/merge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 14:42, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OCEGRS, trivial intersection between occupation and ethnicity. There is mostly no need to merge, the articles are already in a parallel Indian or Pakistani category if applicable. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like a notable intersection [7][8]--User:Namiba 14:10, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is mainly about Indian descent, as the second link also illustrates. Hardly any of these articles is about someone of Pakistani descent, while a clear majority of Punjabi are Pakistanis. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:40, 21 April 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) 13:00, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:22, 7 May 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:Quebec Kebs[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:38, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Defunct minor league team containing no articles except the team article, the arena it temporarily inhabited, and the coaches category. User:Namiba 14:43, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:22, 7 May 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:Defunct National Basketball League of Canada teams[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:38, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The NBLC itself is defunct. User:Namiba 14:44, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:22, 7 May 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.

IIHF Ice Hockey Women's World Championships[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 15#IIHF Ice Hockey Women's World Championships

Category:Rātana politicians[edit]

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. No prejudice against a new, specific nomination. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 16:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. No need to merge, the subcategory is already in the tree of the three potential targets. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:24, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are we certain there are no Rātana people who stood but were not elected? I would prefer to keep ‘politicians’, but delete ‘MPs’. If that is not preferred, then yes, I would still delete ‘politicians’. — HTGS (talk) 00:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: there seems to be a lot of confusion in this category (and in articles relating to Rātana as a political force). Some of these people are adherents of the Rātana faith who became MPs, others of them were MPs for the Rātana Party or (after affiliation with the Labour Party) MPs officially endorsed by the Rātana church. Soraya Peke-Mason, for example, is a Rātana, but not an official Rātana-endorsed MP. If that can be cleared up I'd support Marcocapelle's second suggestion (merging MPs into politicians). Grutness...wha? 14:22, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:01, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:17, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle, Grutness, and HTGS: what are your current thoughts? Which categories should (or should not) be merged to which categories? (I will note that Category:New Zealand Rātanas is now at Category:Rātana people.) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 11:55, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a baffling one. Perhaps Category:Rātana-endorsed MPs would make sense, but I'm not entirely convinced. Grutness...wha? 13:08, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • If they are actual Rātanas, then yes. If not, then just merge them back into the politician level, I suppose. Grutness...wha? 05:05, 17 May 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:Belgian Ministers of Defence[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename as nominated, except for downcasing the MOS:JOBTITLES. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:25, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, "of country" seems to be the standard format. I am not sure about the capitalization. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:13, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the nom. Looking at the Category:Defense ministers by country category tree, the vast majority use a "Defence ministers of X" format, my original proposal was to rename any that don't to match the category tree per C2C. A similar situation is seen in the other ministers category trees. AusLondonder (talk) 20:06, 7 May 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:Paintings of the Sacrifice of Isaac[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:18, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only very few articles in Category:Paintings of Isaac and it is not part of any other tree because Category:Sacrifice of Isaac or Category:Binding of Isaac does not exist. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:24, 7 May 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:Canadian people of Tajik descent[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 15#Category:Canadian people of Tajik descent

Category:British people of Tajik descent[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 15#Category:British people of Tajik descent

Category:Caucasus Jews[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 15#Category:Caucasus Jews

People from British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies by ethnic or national origin[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:rename for consistency with the subcategories which are aĺl "by descent", as well as for consistency with Category:British people by descent at the top of the tree. This is follow-up after this earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:08, 7 May 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 of West Asian descent[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 15#Category:People of West Asian descent

Category:Chinese retired emperors[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: More clear, consistent with related categories. Remsense诉 06:45, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Preferably nominate the Japanese and Vietnamese sibling categories too. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:54, 7 May 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:Union Theological Seminary (New York City)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:38, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: In line with the main article about the subject, which was recently the subject of a requested move discussion that determined that the New York seminary is the primary topic for the title. Graham (talk) 04:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom – the previous discussion has established that Union Theological Seminary is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, so this should be followed in the category name. Robminchin (talk) 20:32, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you clarify what you mean? As discussed in the RM discussion, of the five other articles listed on that disambiguation page:
  • Three of them use a name prefixed with a city and we were unable to find any references to any of them as simply "Union Theological Seminary". (As partial title matches, they're probably borderline cases as to whether they should even be listed in the body of the disambiguation page rather than the see also section.)
  • One of them (Union Presbyterian Seminary) was historically known as "Union Theological Seminary" but changed their name a number of years ago in part to distinguish themselves from the much better-known New York seminary. (By way of comparison, the fact that the University of Portland was historically known as "Columbia University" rightly doesn't stop the title Category:Columbia University from being used for the New York institution.)
  • One of them (Union Theological Seminary (Philippines)) is so obscure that, despite apparently being an English-language institution, there was minimal information available online about them. IACOBVS suggested that they may have actually been named after the New York seminary.
This would seem to be a clear-cut case of a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, especially when we take into account the fact that the New York seminary is recognized internationally as a major intellectual centre of mainline Protestantism and liberal theology and its article is viewed 10 times more often than Union Presbyterian Seminary and 26 times more often than Union Theological Seminary (Philippines).
Additionally, why would we use a different title for the article versus the category? Graham (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Graham: we frequently do that with categories that have ambiguous names. A higher level of primacy is required for categories, otherwise it is highly likely that articles will be placed incorrectly in a category based on its name alone, without checking the scope specified on the category page. – Fayenatic London 21:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but in this case, it is nigh inconceivable that a user would place an article incorrectly in this category. Three of the other institutions have never shared a name with the New York seminary, so there is no ambiguity. One of them hasn't shared a name with the New York seminary for years. And – given that the Philippine seminary appears to be so insignificant that I would be shocked to learn that there is even a single academic there that meets our notability standards – there is no risk that anyone would assume it to have its own category or that an article that belongs in such a theoretical category would even exist. Graham (talk) 16:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notified: User talk:Station1, User talk:IACOBVS, User talk:Walrasiad, User talk:Robertsky. Reason: Participated in the RM discussion. Graham (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notified: Talk:Union Theological Seminary, WT:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard, WT:WikiProject Columbia University, WT:WikiProject Higher education, WT:WikiProject New York (state), WT:WikiProject New York City, WT:WikiProject Reformed Christianity. Graham (talk) 19:21, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Seems most logical and within policy. Ergo Sum 20:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support based on the fact that the proposed names are currently redlinks and there is little likelihood of them becoming ambiguous among categories in the foreseeable future. Station1 (talk) 03:03, 8 May 2024 (UTC) <responding to ping>[reply]
  • Support per nom and for the above rationales stated. Disambiguation is not needed for these 3 articles per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. IACOBVS (talk) 04:43, 8 May 2024 (UTC) <responding to ping>[reply]
  • Comment: If not changed per proposed, then recommend changing to Category:Union Theological Seminary (New York) to shorten. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 12:38, 8 May 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.


May 6[edit]

Category:Sámi educators[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:56, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. It mirrors the same well-formed categories for non-Sámi educators. I have added one more category to this and at least two more categories could easily be created to add to this one based on the structure of the category for non-Sámi educators. -Yupik (talk) 15:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Slight lean oppose. I have mixed feelings because it's a pretty common parent category, making it helpful for navigation. (Moreover, I think that Sami educator is more defining than Sami schoolteacher). Regardless, Yupik's reason for keeping isn't a good reason to keep or create categories. Please review WP:EGRS before making more categories. Mason (talk) 16:14, 28 April 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) 23:57, 6 May 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:Ossetian male writers[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 14#Category:Ossetian male writers

Category:Deaths from food poisoning[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 15#Category:Deaths from food poisoning

Category:Animated characters debuting in 1972[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Neither of the articles listed here are for fictional characters, but their television shows. I could not find any other entries for this category. If this category is kept, it should be at Category:Animated characters introduced in 1972 anyway. (Oinkers42) (talk) 21:12, 6 May 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.


Actors by ethnicity[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content of these categories. The diffusing attribute is not these actors' ancestors but it is rather their own ethnicity. Also, this aligns with parent Category:People by occupation and ethnicity. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:12, 6 May 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:Categories without CatAutoTOC and friends[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 15#Category:Categories without CatAutoTOC and friends

French violinists by gender and century[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:NARROWCAT and WP:OCEGRS, narrow intersections with gender, for none of these categories there will be a topic article in its own right. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:29, 6 May 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:Goldey College football[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:57, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category lacks subjects Let'srun (talk) 18:10, 6 May 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:Male fiddlers[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:57, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. There is no need to merge somewhere, the subcategory is already in appropriate categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom without prejudice. NLeeuw (talk) 21:22, 7 May 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:2024 United States Libertarian presidential primaries[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:57, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one page, doesn’t fit with similar category styles Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 16:34, 6 May 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 Canadian people by ethnic or national origin[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category level with only two subcategories each. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom without prejudice. NLeeuw (talk) 21:22, 7 May 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.

Architects[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 14#Architects

Category:Whai players[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 13:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Whai (basketball) is now Tauranga Whai. I created the category when the team name did not have "Tauranga" in it. The team name is now officially "Tauranga Whai". DaHuzyBru (talk) 10:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, for consistency with main article's name (Tauranga Whai). Paora (talk) 09:42, 7 May 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:Dual men's international footballers[edit]

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:Dual internationalists (men's football). (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 13:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: They are men's footballers who are dual internationals, the current order does not make grammatical sense. An alternative would be Dual internationalists (men's football), mirroring how the female players cat has been named‎ Crowsus (talk) 09:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alternative, similarity would be good, and I feel that the alternative fits it better. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 16:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 15:42, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alternative to match the women's naming. GiantSnowman 15:44, 7 May 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:Anarchism task force participants[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 13:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It has been years since the anarchism taskforce of WikiProject Philosophy was expanded into its own dedicated WikiProject, but this category has yet to be updated to reflect that. This proposed move is a simple update to reflect the category's current use by WikiProject Anarchism. Grnrchst (talk) 08:28, 6 May 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:18th-century German male violinists[edit]

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:18th-century German violinists and reparent. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I think we should broaden this category to include violinists of all genders. Non of the othe 18th-century violinists are diffused by gender and there isn't a 18th-century german violinists category. Mason (talk) 03:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename and re-parent per nom, despite the fact that the French 18th-century violinists are also diffused by gender. It is rather the French males that should be upmerged. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC) Marcocapelle (talk) 04:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename and re-parent per nom without prejudice. NLeeuw (talk) 21:23, 7 May 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:Poisoned Romans[edit]

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:Poisoned ancient Romans. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duel upmerge as Non-defining intersection between nationality and method of death. Category:Victims of intentional poisonings isn't diffused by nationality. If not merged, it should be renamed Poisoned ancient Romans. Mason (talk) 16:10, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "Category:Victims of intentional poisonings isn't diffused by nationality." Why the heck not? Murder victim categories are typically subdivided by nationality. Dimadick (talk) 16:46, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, are you going to diffuse it by nationality? I did't consider the category populated enough to need diffusion. Mason (talk) 17:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am not seeing any opposition to the rename (noting it was suggested in the OP and seconded by Marcocapelle). Further comments – both about the rename and the merge – would be appreciated, but if there are none I would close this as rename with no consensus on whether this should exist or not.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename is fine by me Mason (talk) 01:04, 14 May 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:American family lawyers[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between occupation, type of law, and nationality. Lawyers are not typically defined by whether they practice family law. Similar to Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_22#Category:Canadian_criminal_lawyers Mason (talk) 01:16, 6 May 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:Tokyo Musashino United FC[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 14#Category:Tokyo Musashino United FC


May 5[edit]

Category:Film templates parameter issues[edit]

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 as nominated. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 13:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is a valid Wikiproject category that exists principally as a container for other Wikiproject tracking categories, but it's straying a bit from its stated purpose: not every category that's been filed here is tracking issues in the "something wrong here that needs to be fixed" sense, and instead some of them are just tracking usages without regard to any "issues". So genuine "issues" categories can be left here, but "usage" categories should be upmerged to the parent instead of being here. Bearcat (talk) 22:48, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The category trees of Template parameter issues by task and Template parameter issues by topic (which includes the nominated category Category:Film templates parameter issues) created by me in 2022 are named this way because of the original category Wikipedia template parameter issues. I too, at some point in this process, realized that some relevant categories are just for tracking/awareness, not for fixing issues. I wouldn't mind renaming the whole category tree into Wikipedia template tracking categories, Template tracking categories by task, and so on.
An alternative would be to make it an additional structure on top: Wikipedia template tracking categories could be the parent of Wikipedia template parameter issues, Template tracking categories by topic – parent of Template parameter issues by topic, and so forth. What do you think?
This is a much larger scope than the original nomination, let me know if you want to limit the discussion here to just the film-related categories. —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:31, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See also Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 200#PetScan or DB query for categories exclusively in Category:Hidden categories and Category:Tracking categories. —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:35, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I forgot to ping Bearcat. —⁠andrybak (talk) 09:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This category isn't being force-transcluded onto its contents via a template, but is just being generically declared as a conventional category declaration, so I'm not sure I see why this is a larger issue. We can just move things out of the category and up to the parent if they're not tracking issues, while leaving things that are tracking issues here, so I really don't grasp why we would need to complicate things by widening the net. Bearcat (talk) 13:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I support splitting and withdraw my proposal for expanding this nomination. I will wait until this nomination closes and try to implement Category:Template tracking categories by topic after that. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:31, 12 May 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:American buskers[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Category:American buskers

Category:Climbing books[edit]

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:Climbing and mountaineering books. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We should merge 'Climbing books' with 'Mountaineering books' to create 'Climbing and Mountaineering books' (as we have done with some other climbing and mountaineering categories like 'List of climbers and mountaineers'). It is not always appropriate to merge 'climbing' and 'mountaineering' but in this case it is not useful to split them as too many of the books include both topics. Aszx5000 (talk) 16:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have tagged Category:Mountaineering books too. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:48, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 19:28, 5 May 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.
This was closed (with the right result imho), but the existing old categories of Category:Climbing books and Category:Mountaineering books remain (with their CfD tags). Do we 'rediredct' them to the new Category:Climbing and mountaineering books or are the deleted? thanks, Aszx5000 (talk) 16:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aszx5000, they are listed on WT:CFDW and will be handled by admins there. — Qwerfjkltalk 17:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great - thanks for the quick reply. Aszx5000 (talk) 17:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The bot merged Category:Mountaineering books into the newly created Category:Climbing and mountaineering books, but it didn't also carry out the second part which is the merger of Category:Climbing books into Category:Climbing and mountaineering book? Can this be fixed. Thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 11:15, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that will be processed shortly. In such cases, the bot needs to process the work in stages – if a merge and a rename to the same target are listed at the same time, it is coded to ignore both instructions. – Fayenatic London 14:24, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great - thanks for that. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional animals by taxon[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Category:Fictional animals by taxon

Category:Cornish people by descent[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:53, 5 May 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.

Brazilian cuisine by region[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Tweaking category names to be more representative of their intended usage. As they stand currently, I believe that the categories could be misunderstood as not aligning with Brazil's official regions. I hope to remedy that with this change. BaduFerreira (talk) 20:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:29, 5 May 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:Sikh military[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Renaming (A) may be a good idea because of parents Category:Sikh Empire and Category:Military by former country, and siblings in Category:Military by former country. However, as @Marcocapelle pointed out at Speedy, this requires more discussion because there is lots of content in the category that pre-dates the Sikh Empire. Moreover, Dharamyudh (Sikhism) (an article I wrote some years ago) is a religious concept, and does not belong solely to the Sikh Empire as a state. Alternately, we could also decide that this is just an WP:ARBITRARYCAT that should be deleted (B). Also, I think that the two recently created children Category:Military units and formations of the Sikhs and Category:Wars involving the Sikhs may be WP:ARBITRARYCATs, which will also have to be renamed (A) or deleted (B). Category:Sikh warriors may be a valid category (if it passes WP:EGRS), but not all those within the military of the Sikh Empire were necessarily adherents of Sikhism, so unless renamed & rescoped, that subcategory should be removed from this tree. Please indicate your preference, as both seem workable solutions to the current issues. NLeeuw (talk) 14:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is a difficult one, because the Sikhs dominated (parts of) Punjab, but did not have a consistent political structure in that region during the two centuries that this category tree is about. They did have military though, to defend their territories. The period covers the Early Mughal–Sikh wars until the Afghan–Sikh wars and it is only during the latter wars that there was first a Sikh Confederacy and later a Sikh Empire. Deletion or purging would certainly be counter-productive because it would arbitrarily break the military history of the region. At most diffuse by different periods. An alternative in a completely different direction is renaming to Category:Sikh military (1621–1849). Marcocapelle (talk) 15:14, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I really don't think we should be categorising military history by religious denomination. That's kinda like creating Category:Anabaptist military and then throwing Münster rebellion and Anabaptist riot in there, as if those were carried out by the Armed Forces of the same "state". They weren't.
    We could split up by state, e.g. Category:Wars involving the Sikh Confederacy and Category:Wars involving the Sikh Empire. I would definitely support that. I could add that as Option C to the nom. NLeeuw (talk) 20:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The comparison with Anabaptists is unfair because the two articles you mentioned are situated at two different places and the Anabaptists held power in only one of them. Hypothetically, if they would have maintained longer in Münster, and if there they would have been called "the Anabaptists" by historians as belligerant in wars, then by all means Category:Anabaptist military would have been a valid category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:17, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I think it is fair, because as you mentioned, the Sikh Empire is a different state than the Sikh Confederacy, and formations such as the Akal Sena are even older, but did not yet have their own state; they were in rebellion against the Mughal Empire. (I suppose that's what you are referring to by your suggestion to start counting form 1621?).
      At any rate, we should avoid categorising military personnel by religion per WP:EGRS. A military or armed group is either always connected to a state, or usually intends to form its own state or quasi-state, and sometimes already operates a proto-state or quasi-state (even gangs and mafia can have territories of influence where they extract 'protection money', i.e. tribute). (It is for this reason that we have maintained Military personnel of Fooland rather than Military personnel from Fooland conventions; their service to Fooland defines them, not their birth or residence in Fooland).
      The Akal Sena was such a group, whose military aspects were defined by their loyalty to Guru Hargobind, and their pursuit to establish an independent Sikh state (the First Sikh State arose in 1709). The personal religious beliefs of the individual soldiers in the Akal Sena are WP:NONDEFINING for the group as a military force in service of a guru and a proto-state in the Punjab region. NLeeuw (talk) 10:42, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • It may have started as a rebellion, but so did the Dutch Republic which is in retrospect said to have started in the 1570s while it was only recognized by Spain in 1648. There is usually a grey area between rebellion and independence. For the Sikhs independence presumably started in 1606 with the Akal Takht and the first battle against the Mughal Empire taking place in 1621, the Battle of Rohilla. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:13, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • See also this follow up discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:55, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am relisting this simultaneous with Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 20#Category:Sikh warriors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 22:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:28, 5 May 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:Sikh warriors[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename and purge, in 1849 the Sikhs ceased to have power in Punjab, the Sikh Empire was merged into British India. The category also contains military personnel of India who happen to be Sikhs, e.g. Jagjit Singh Aurora, they should be purged as a matter of trivial intersection. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:47, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question What do you think this category is supposed to contain right now? And what do you think the category should contain?
Because what I am seeing is an inappropriate intersection of the Category:People by nationality tree and the Category:People by religion tree
Category:People by nationality > Category:People by occupation and nationality > Category:Military personnel by nationality > Category:Warriors by nationality > Category:Indian warriors > Category:Sikh warriors
Category:People by religion > Category:People by religion and nationality > Category:Sikhs by nationality > Category:Indian Sikhs > Category:Sikh warriors
Even the Category:People by ethnicity tree is mixed up in it because of parent Category:Punjabi people, but that could easily be Purged.
The word "Sikh" thus acquires a double meaning, namely adherents of Sikhism and subjects of the Sikh Empire or Sikh Confederacy. As you noted, The category also contains military personnel of India who happen to be Sikhs, e.g. Jagjit Singh Aurora. Therefore, the current name is ambiguous. The renaming proposal will not resolve that ambiguity. If we are to identify them with the Sikh Empire as you mentioned in the rationale, then we should alt rename to Category:Military personnel of the Sikh Empire. This would be in line with my proposal A to rename the parent Category:Sikh military to Category:Military personnel of the Sikh Empire, with possibly a separate category for Category:Military personnel of the Sikh Confederacy. NLeeuw (talk) 10:20, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Oh I see you already created Category:Military personnel of the Sikh Empire as a subcategory of Category:Sikh warriors 3 days ago. Shall we also create Category:Military personnel of the Sikh Confederacy and diffuse the rest? NLeeuw (talk) 10:46, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Based on the proposal my response is predictable: I think the category is supposed to contain Sikh warriors while the Sikhs were self-governing, i.e. governing the Punjab region in which they were in the majority. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:27, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sidenote: there wasn't really any such thing as military personnel of the Sikh Confederacy since the military was primarily organized per member state. They just joined forces upon need. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:42, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
while the Sikhs were self-governing, i.e. governing the Punjab region in which they were in the majority. I'm afraid that is an WP:ARBITRARYCAT. Political and military control over an area never perfectly coincides with the area where a certain ethnic, linguistic, religious etc. group lives or lived. That is the fiction of the modern nation-state, that you can have population and state borders coincide. E.g. there never was a time when all inhabitants of the "Netherlands" were "Dutch" by ethnicity, language, nationality or whatever, nor did they ever all adhere to exactly the same religion. Crosscats of people by nationality, by religion, by ethnicity and by language are always inappropriate for that reason.
If confederacies / confederations do not have military personnel, how come we've got: Category:Confederate States of America military personnel, Category:Swiss military personnel by century before 1848 (when Switzerland transformed from a confederation to a federation) etc.? Besides, there is an article about Dal Khalsa (Sikh Army). NLeeuw (talk) 14:38, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is more than likely that the area that the Sikhs controlled did not exactly match with the spread of their religion. But that does not matter for the articles which are clearly about Sikh warriors defending their territories. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:45, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sidenote: Category:16th-century Swiss military personnel is vague enough about how the military is organized, just like Category:Sikh warriors. It is not Category:16th-century military personnel of the Swiss Confederacy. On the other hand the Confederate States of America never seem to have had separate armies per state. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:10, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting simultaneous with Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 27#Category:Sikh military.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 22:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:28, 5 May 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:Battles of the Moldavian campaign of Tymofiy Khmelnytsky[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 13:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now without prejudice. Template:Campaignbox Moldavian campaign of Tymofiy Khmelnytsky indicates that this category could include up to 8 articles, but only 3 of them have been written so far, and they are fine to leave in the parent category for now. NLeeuw (talk) 14:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: An argument could be made to merge Template:Campaignbox Moldavian campaign of Tymofiy Khmelnytsky to Template:Campaignbox Khmelnytsky Uprising for now as well, but that's beyond the scope of CFD. NLeeuw (talk) 14:58, 5 May 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:Paintings of Hebrew Bible themes[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 14#Category:Paintings of Hebrew Bible themes

Category: Willesden Cemetery[edit]

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: Speedy delete under G7. – Fayenatic London 12:57, 7 May 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:Australian business executives by industry[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation to only have one category in here. Mason (talk) 04:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:21, 5 May 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:Australian mining entrepreneurs[edit]

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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: overlapping category. Also there's no Category:Mining entrepreneurs (which suggests that this tree is probably also redundant) Mason (talk) 04:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
support - good points made - however for the record - despite the fact that in the Australian context an entrepreneur tends to infer an investor/wealthy person, whereas businessperson includes and infers potentially management level - the lack of mining entrepeneurs as a tree seems to deny the universal phenomenon, which is extensive. JarrahTree 07:55, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
indifferent - closer examination - the specific article exists, and the separation between magnate/business person is clearly made at the head of the category - whereas the american mining business people conflates the issue by having text inside the main page Magnates of the mining industry. The conflation is unhelpful and combines the entrepreneurs and the rest. A merge will simply make a mess. JarrahTree 08:10, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, the content of this category is a conflation anyway, with many articles about upper management level. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:30, 5 May 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:Jewish communities destroyed in the Holocaust[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Category:Jewish communities destroyed in the Holocaust

Further back[edit]

See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 22 to 42 days and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 43 to 63 days.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Previous_8_to_21_days&oldid=1048280107"