Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 43 to 63 days

Shortcut

WP:CFDVVOLD

Today's discussions and up to 7 days old

See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All current discussions

Old CfD discussions

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 8 to 21 days

Very old CfD discussions

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 22 to 42 days

Very very old CfD Discussions

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 43 to 63 days

43 to 49 days old

October 19

Category:Classical Marxist parties in the United States

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Classical Marxist parties in the United States to Category:Marxist parties in the United States

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There's only on page in here, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason (talk) 23:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. There isn't even a Category:Classical Marxist parties. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Video games by narrative genre

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:06, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Video games by narrative genre to Category:Video games by theme

Nominator's rationale: This category was nominated for merging but was opposed, however, upon looking at the previous discussion, it wasn't opposed with righteous consent. Dimadick just said "Oppose, Genres are not limited to common themes, but also to the tone of the work." and that lead to the closure. He provide much information, it is better

This category is currently just a mess of content. I understand how it is an attempt to create a category containing video games with THEMES based on the genres of film and literature, but it still very insulting to what video game genres really are. For instance Western (genre) video games do not have their own article as their not their own thing, it isn't considered a genre and never will be, it did not originate in video games.

Some of the things in this category have still been cited as a genre to a degree, including entries with an article: horror game, Christian video game, and even science fiction video game (which I still won't ever consider genre despite having an article). But keep in mind that Buddhist, Halloween, Christmas, Wuxia or even Medical are rarely known as genres across any medium of media. Just think about it: Christmas film is a redirect to Christmas by medium - Christmas films are clearly a theme rather than a genre, this is because their just defined by a specific annual Christian celebration that they are about, rather than a style or set of the mood such as comedy or drama.

Please stop and think for a seconds or even minutes if you are willing to just go ahead, oppose this discussion, and then call it a day. It will break my heart if really do such as thing after all the time and effort I went through to write all this.

FINAL NOTE: The only real subcategories of this category which are genres that literarily originated in video games are: Category:Advergames Category:Art games Category:Educational video games (this is clearly distinct from educational TV programs, because it is interactive entertainment software designed to educate the users) QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger per my arguments from the previous discussion. Are you really sure about beating this same horse again after only 2 months? I still believe that there's an important difference between gameplay genres and story genres for video games. Instead of merging, why not just purge what you think are not proper genres from this category? AHI-3000 (talk) 06:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger The genre is much wider than a mere "theme". Dimadick (talk) 12:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The current system is not that great. But merging one into the other is not really a solution. Technically, "by theme" means "by feature" - a specific subject that appears in the game, while the word "narrative" means more like plot. The latter would be correct under Category:Fiction genres, which was once merged into "Literature genres". But "fiction genre" is not just about plot, but also about setting or/and visual style. For example, Category:Cyberpunk video games is not necessarily "narrative", but may just be visual theme and setting. "Western video game" is always about setting, but may also be about plot and visual theme. Whereas Category:Horror video games is always about plot and not visual theme or setting. So "narrative genre" should probably be changed to something else. Solidest (talk) 16:56, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger Narrative genre is distinct from theme, and arguably more fundamental to categorization.--Trystan (talk) 14:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steam tags guideline Actually shows how this should be sorted neatly, and partly matches what I wrote above. A lot of what we put in 'narrative genre' can actually be classified as 'theme' (like Christmas, Detective, Cyberpunk, Satire). And what is in Category:Video games by theme, on the other hand, can hardly be called 'theme'. It's more like 'by topic'. And it actually lists "Holiday-themed games" (that's a theme, isn't it?), "Video games about revenge" (that's a plot, so it's narrative), and so on. It all looks like a big mess, and we should just follow the way it's organised on Steam. The first thing to do would be renaming 'Video games by theme' to 'Video games by feature' and 'Video games by narrative genre' to 'Video games by theme'. Solidest (talk) 03:09, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:All articles with inline parenthetical referencing

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:55, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:All articles with inline parenthetical referencing to Category:All articles with parenthetical referencing

Nominator's rationale: I propose renaming this category to match the new maintenance tag name, Template:Parenthetical referencing (the old name was Template:Inline parenthetical referencing). I tried to change the code to start placing the new category name, but was reverted, so I guess this needs to come to CFD. This will affect around 15 articles in the category. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:37, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Akseki to Category:People from Antalya Province

Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 18:03, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:43, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, now listed in town article. – Fayenatic London 20:57, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Wikipedia administrator elections 2024 voter guides

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 18:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Wikipedia administrator elections 2024 voter guides (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections#What should the page say on voting guides? closed with a consensus that voter guides should not be encouraged or advertised, this category is clearly contrary to that consensus. Thryduulf (talk) 15:55, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Acknowledging the existence of something is not the same as encouraging it and the close said nothing about "advertised". Since the whole purpose of a guide is that others read them, hiding them away would have the same effect as disallowing them – you've tried getting consensus for that, and it didn't happen. This category is a bare-minimum way of keeping track of what guides have been written, using the same pattern we've used for ArbCom elections for nearly two decades. – Joe (talk) 16:09, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voter guides for arbcom have explicit community consensus for their existence and advertising, and other than being an election on en.wp bear almost no similarities to admin elections. Collating voter guides and advertising it on the talk page is very clearly encouraging them - contrary to the explicit consensus not to do that (for all the reasons explained in the discussion). Thryduulf (talk) 16:49, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (ec) The somewhat thin consensus, among the small group organising this election, indeed concerned "What should the page say on voting guides?" - ie Wikipedia: Administrator elections. This category is not, and presumably will not be, mentioned on that page. Meanwhile the election has amazed everybody by attracting 35 candidates, raising different and urgent questions that were not anticipated. Some of the small group of organisers have been ready to adapt to this situation, and some have not. Johnbod (talk) 16:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some have been adapting in manner consistent with the RFC consensus, others have not. The existence of voter guides at all is not compatible with that consensus, but here we are. Thryduulf (talk) 16:47, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell the only mention of voter guides in the original RfC was a comment expressing concern that there'd be enough time to write them. – Joe (talk) 17:42, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I found this very useful. C F A 💬 16:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why is that relevant? Thryduulf (talk) 16:49, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Categorization is supposed to help navigation. Which is likely what the user found useful. Mason (talk) 23:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't answer the question of why it is relevant to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep regulatory overreach, strike the post at the relevant talk page if it offends. Draken Bowser (talk) 17:01, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The question being asked in the discussion in question was limited to the text on the administration elections page. To have a greater scope, such as whether or not a category should exist, a broader consensus should be obtained from the community. isaacl (talk) 17:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. These are actually pretty useful, and ultimately to the extent that the guides themselves are allowed to exist, then it is hard to argue that their categorization can't exist? Aszx5000 (talk) 18:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the same closer's explanation later - My sense is that the main election page may not link to them, but there's nothing stopping an editor from compiling a list of voter guides, or categorising them for organisation and discovery. (emphasis mine). Also courtesy ping @ProcrastinatingReader: as said closer. Soni (talk) 21:27, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, a category could only be “advertising” to the gnomiest of wikignomes. There was consensus against banning or discouraging guides, so people should be allowed to find them if they want to. Toadspike [Talk] 21:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Personally, I'm not happy about how this worked out, but that doesn't matter for purposes of this discussion. We have now had a clarification from the editor who closed the discussion about guides (link), indicating that guides are permitted and can be discussed at places like candidate pages, so it makes sense to have a category for them. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In no sense can categorization reasonably be considered to be advertising. Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see no issue with them. The consensus linked to says they aren't encouraged or discouraged. This should mean they shouldn't be deleted. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 20:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw. I still think this falls too far on the side of encouraging them (and still think that neither encouraging nor discouraging is more lenient than we should be being towards them) but it is clear my view does not accord with consensus. Thryduulf (talk) 09:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Chataignier, Louisiana to Category:People from Evangeline Parish, Louisiana

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 14:22, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:54, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator.Lost in Quebec (talk) 18:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, now listed in village article. – Fayenatic London 20:54, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Athens, Louisiana to Category:People from Claiborne Parish, Louisiana

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 14:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:54, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator.Lost in Quebec (talk) 18:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, now listed in town article. – Fayenatic London 20:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Woodburn, Kentucky to Category:People from Warren County, Kentucky

Nominator's rationale: Article contains a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 14:09, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:55, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator.Lost in Quebec (talk) 18:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, now listed in town article. – Fayenatic London 20:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Walnut, Illinois to Category:People from Bureau County, Illinois

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:55, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator.Lost in Quebec (talk) 18:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, already listed in town article. – Fayenatic London 20:45, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Eastford, Connecticut to Category:People from Windham County, Connecticut

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:56, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator.Lost in Quebec (talk) 18:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nomination. Eastford is in the middle of nowhere (population 1,649 in 2020) so this category has poor prospects for growth. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:01, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, already listed in town article. – Fayenatic London 20:49, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Private schools Northern Beaches Sydney

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 26#Category:Private schools Northern Beaches Sydney

Category:People from Loxley, Alabama

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:51, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Loxley, Alabama to Category:People from Baldwin County, Alabama

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 11:09, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:01, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator.Lost in Quebec (talk) 18:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, now listed in town article. – Fayenatic London 20:47, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Ancient Indian monarchies

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. CSD G7 Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:49, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Ancient Indian monarchies to Category:Ancient empires and kingdoms of India

Nominator's rationale: merge, strongly overlapping scope. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (changed vote per below) Reverse merge: I would suggest the merging Category:Ancient empires and kingdoms of India to Category:Ancient Indian monarchies instead as "Ancient Indian monarchies" is more concise. PadFoot (talk) 11:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For sure the page of Category:Ancient empires and kingdoms of India should be kept since that is the far older page. I do not have a strong opinion on whether or not to rename that page to Category:Ancient Indian monarchies. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:49, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, I think it would be better if we can have a discussion regarding this whole thing at the main CfD. I've removed the articles from this category and added back Category:Ancient empires and kingdoms of India to the appropriate articles in this category. I've also changed my vote above. Can I place a speedy deletion template (db-author) in the page if that would be better? PadFoot (talk) 17:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @PadFoot2008: thank you, that simplifies the situation. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As noted, this category has been emptied. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:51, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Songwriter unknown to Category:Songs with unknown songwriters

Nominator's rationale: We name categories as noun phrases. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 07:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom – ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 05:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. CSD G7 Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Middle kingdoms of India to Category:Medieval empires and kingdoms of India

Nominator's rationale: merge, this is an out-of-process rename. The correct procedure is to nominate Category:Medieval empires and kingdoms of India for renaming. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as a duplicate category under a weird name. The target is itself nominated at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 15#Empires and kingdoms of foo. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 07:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, it is not a weird name, see Middle kingdoms of India. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It is a more concise name, and has a different scope. It includes the post-Mauryan and pre-Sultanate era, and is not a duplicate category. PadFoot (talk) 11:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It strongly overlaps and you have been moving articles from Category:Medieval empires and kingdoms of India to Category:Middle kingdoms of India. If we keep both categories these articles should also be in both categories but I think this is too much duplication. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've deleted the category per our discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 15#Empires and kingdoms of foo. PadFoot (talk) 10:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Water polo teams in Czechoslovakia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Water polo in Czechoslovakia. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:Water polo teams in Czechoslovakia to Category:Water polo in Czechoslovakia and Category:Sports clubs and teams in Czechoslovakia

Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge. There's only one page in here Mason (talk) 03:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Single merge to Category:Water polo in Czechoslovakia because the article is already in Category:National sports teams of Czechoslovakia. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine with me Mason (talk) 23:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Czechoslovak water polo people

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

The result of the discussion was: merge. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:51, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Czechoslovak water polo people to Category:Water polo in Czechoslovakia

Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer Mason (talk) 03:50, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:09, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:3rd-century Vietnamese women

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:51, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:3rd-century Vietnamese women to Category:3rd-century Vietnamese people and Category:3rd-century women

Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge. isolated category Mason (talk) 03:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Online-only games

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 26#Category:Online-only games

Category:Over the Hedge video games

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

The result of the discussion was: no consensus to merge/delete. I will remove the entries in Category:Over the Hedge which should be diffused per WP:DIFFUSE. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:14, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Over the Hedge video games (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Entirely contained within Category:Over the Hedge. Either we have two categories with three entries or one with six. We do not need the entries in this category to be contained within both. (Oinkers42) (talk) 18:32, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If not kept we should probably merge rather than delete. Potential merge targets are Category:Video games based on comics, Category:Video games based on animated films, Category:Video games about raccoons, Category:Video games about reptiles, Category:Works about friendship and Category:Video games set in Indiana. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:19, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge? If so, merge targets?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and purge Category:Over the Hedge of redundant entries. It helpfully diffuses a lot of categories, as Marcocapelle listed. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on QuietHere's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:54, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Purging the parent category, per QuietHere, is the other possible way forward. We should default to that if there isn't going to be clarity and consensus about merging. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Summer camps in fiction

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

The result of the discussion was: reverse merge the first, regular merge the second, keep the third. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Fiction about summer camps to Category:Summer camps in fiction
Propose merging Category:Summer camps in film to Category:Summer camps in fiction
Propose merging Category:Video games set in summer camps to Category:Works set in summer camps

Nominator's rationale: Category #1: Single-entry category that conflicts with its parent category. Category #2: Redundant category layer that only has a single subcategory. Category #3: Category containing only a single article. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:31, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Still retains the general idea of what we are trying to categorize. KConWiki (talk) 04:32, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reverse merge the first one - the order is incorrect as the target is the newer category and the one with the improper name. Merge the second one to Category:Fiction about summer camps for similar reasons. Oppose the last one, I have populated the category enough for it to remain (largely from the TVTropes list). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:41, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support alternative by Zxcvbnm, "fiction about foo" is more clearly a defining characteristic than "foo in fiction". Marcocapelle (talk) 17:31, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all to Category:Fiction about summer camps per Zxcvbnm. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Summer camps in fiction.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:48, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose 3 per Zxcvbnm (I also added more entries to the category). Support the other two. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:43, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am having seafood tonight. I didn't tag the category. Apologies. I will tag Category:Summer camps in fiction, for real this time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:54, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to QuietHere: Oppose what? I believe you're referring to all 3 categories except Category:Video games set in summer camps, not just all 3 of them. ::QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:45, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
3 meaning the third nomination, Video games set in summer camps into Works set in summer camps. I oppose that merger because the category has a sufficient number of entries now. I support the other two nominations. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 03:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah ok, the rationale for merging the third category is no longer valid. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:22, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Comedy directors

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:08, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:American comedy film directors (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:British comedy film directors (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Canadian comedy film directors (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Parody film directors (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Comedy film directors (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) (Added subsequent to initial creation of CfD)

Nominator's rationale: While we're talking about directors versus actors, I feel the same principles as those outlined in WP:PERFCAT, and which resulted in the deletion of multiple "comedy actors" categories[1] may apply here. DonIago (talk) 14:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose American comedy film directors & British comedy film directors, which diffuse American film directors & British film directors, respectively. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 14:16, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose any that facilitate diffusion ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 16:47, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If these need to go, then the parent Category:Comedy film directors (which you haven't tagged as part of this) also needs to go. I'm not wedded to the need for it, but there's absolutely no argument to be had that the parent is fine and only the subcategories are a problem: if it's fine, then subcategories for countries with a large enough number of entries are automatically fair game under it, and there can be absolutely no serious argument that only the subcategories are a problem if the parent isn't. There additionally can't be any serious argument that the US and the UK should get subcategories but Canada shouldn't, either — national subcategories aren't applied on any basis more refined or subjective than "has enough entries to support one", so there can't be a serious argument that American and British directors should get subcategories while Canadian ones shouldn't. So either we need to delete the parent category as well, or they all have to stay. Bearcat (talk) 14:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect, I don't see any suggestion here that I might have simply overlooked the existence of some categories that should be included here. You're welcome to add those in if you feel they should be part of the conversation. Please assume good faith. Do you have an argument other than, "Why are some categories included but related categories missing?" DonIago (talk) 14:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect, the non-inclusion of directly related categories that are subject to the same issues as the included categories is a relevant and germane point in a CFD discussion. There's simply no reason why these should all be deleted at the same time as the parent Category:Comedy film directors being kept — if the parent is acceptable, then national subcategories for countries with a large-enough number of entries for them are inherently acceptable as well, and if the national subcategories aren't warranted then the parent category isn't warranted either — and any person in any of these categories could simply be readded to the parent category at will by any editor at any time, which would inevitably be followed by these categories getting recreated because the parent category had become large enough to need diffusion into subcategories again (which is the reason why these even exist in the first place: because the parent category existed and needed diffusion). So my point stands, and I will brook no further clapback about it — it's not my job to add related categories to this discussion, it's your job to either add the related category or explain why you think it's different. Bearcat (talk) 16:17, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How very collaborative of you. I'll add the additional categories shortly. DonIago (talk) 16:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, WP:PERFCAT is about specific shows in which subjects participate. That is quite different than genre, which we are discussing here. Frankly I think diffusion by genre is more relevant than by location (which is also being done in this tree, at least in the US). Marcocapelle (talk) 17:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I'm not sure I see the practical difference, in this case, regarding whether we're talking about categorizing actors by genre versus categorizing directors by genre? I realize categories are generally inclusive rather than exclusive (i.e. just because a director directed comedies and is categorized as such doesn't mean they didn't also direct in other film genres), but the same could be said about the actor categories as well. TL;DR why would "actors by genre" be bad but "directors by genre" not be bad? You say that PERFCAT is about specific shows, but in the CfD that I linked to the consensus appears to have been that genre does constitute a type of performance. I'm also, as I was with the prior CfD, concerned that we risk opening the door to creating multiple additional "Director by genre"-style categories. Is it really a defining characteristic in most cases (I'm genuinely asking here; my instinct is that most directors have directed films from various genres, but maybe I'm wrong)? ETA: I do see that we do have "Film directors by genre"...I'm going to keep the scope of this limited rather than make it all-inclusive at this time, as a test case. DonIago (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We are now discussing all categories. Thoughts on the merits of the proposal would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:53, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Historical figures with ambiguous or disputed sexuality

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. Thorough discussion, and unlikely a WP:RELIST will help. I will direct further conversation to Wikipedia talk:Categorizing articles about people#Proposed update to CATLGBT – and if that discussion results in consensus to keep that guidance, please feel free to re-file this CFD. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:44, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Historical figures with ambiguous or disputed sexuality (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: A newly created category that is a violation of the last paragraph of WP:CATLGBT, as well as inevitably leading to WP:NPOV and WP:NOTADVOCACY violations.

CATLGBT states, Categories that make allegations about sexuality—such as "closeted homosexuals" or "people suspected of being gay"—are not acceptable under any circumstances. If such a category is created, it should be immediately depopulated and deleted. Community consensus is clearly against such categories. The existence of this category is an invitation for people to use it to claim as many historical figures as 'maybe homosexual' as possible. It will be a magnet for OR, undue and fringe. A category that's very basis is that something about it's members is disputed cannot be defining. Golikom (talk) 01:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think given the distinction between historical figures and BLP at least makes OP's critique problematic and the policy worth rethinking. However, I still have rather significant reservations about these categories as formulated at present—they seem overbroad and non-defining to a degree I feel is untenable. Remsense ‥ 论 01:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator of this category, I understand the present complaints, and I have been careful to only apply this category to articles which discuss historical interpretations of a subject's sexuality to some considerable length. I think any article with a well-cited subsection or even separate article discussing theories surrounding a subject's sexuality would be worth considering in this category, but I fully understand how the category in it's current design and application could easily be overapplied and misappropriated. I don't believe the solution is deletion, rather it should be stricter enforcement of some standards to define terms like "ambiguous" and "disputed" and how those are separate from "fringe theories." I don't think the LGBT issue should apply here since, like you said, the category does not apply to BLP articles. However, the rule and it's current wording may need to be reassessed to be more specific. It's also worth considering that Category:Historical figures with ambiguous or disputed gender identity barely survived a deletion request for similar reasons. Rylee Amelia (talk) 02:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lean delete. But you're not the only person who will use the category. This category is going to be a mess to maintain. Mason (talk) 03:23, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The temptation to speculate about the sexual orientation of historical figures leads people to suppose that that speculation is OK in an encyclopedia. But looking at, for example, Sexuality of Abraham Lincoln, what I see is that the lead section decisively dismisses the speculation:

Mainstream historians generally hold that Lincoln was heterosexual, noting that the historical context explains any of the supposed evidence.

Then the remainder of the article, which is well beyond the stub level, discusses various theories that are fringe, or discredited, or whatever.

I realize that for some historical figures, the discussion of their sexuality has risen above fringe level. But from this example, one can see that there is a strong tendency to promote "was he gay or wasn't he" to encyclopedia level just for the pleasure of idol-smashing. Bruce leverett (talk) 16:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Consistent with long-term existence of Category:Historical figures with ambiguous or disputed gender identity. This category fills a conspicuous void. Where an article contains a well-cited discussion of the subject's sexuality (Edward II of England § Piers Gaveston and sexuality, Sappho § Sexuality) or there is enough weight in reliable sources for an entire sub-article (Sexuality of James VI and I), it is a disservice to the reader not to have that content reflected in the category structure to aid finding similar articles. This absolutely is defining (per WP:CATDEF) in that it is an aspect of these subjects that reliable sources commonly and consistently refer to. I don't see any particular great difficulty in applying it. An article with a substantial, well-sourced subsection (or sub-article) discussing disputes or ambiguity over the article's sexuality is clearly in scope. We don't get rid of Category:Mountains just because every hill could be argued to be a mountain. WP:CATLGBT should be updated as proposed here to remove its pejorative language and limit its application to BLPs.--Trystan (talk) 02:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is deleted so should Category:Historical figures with ambiguous or disputed gender identity. The rationale behind keeping/deleting both are the same. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. That category doesn't specify if one is gay/lesbian or bisexual, or another sexuality. Also, currently only the notable cases are in it, many of which "suspected" or "closeted" don't apply because most of them publicly lived this way without such words being coined. But I could argue that some articles within it overlap with Category:Sexuality of individuals. Web-julio (talk) 03:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another comment: doesn't the term ambiguous sexuality have another meaning? At least "sexually ambiguous" technically meant bisexual/asexual, androgynous/gnc/n-b, or intersex in the past. I think we can use synonyms, such as questionable, or dubious. Web-julio (talk) 05:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, it is a borderline defining characteristic. A list may be better than a category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The distinction between historical figures and BLP is relevant only to the first paragraph of WP:CATLGBT. Anyway, the last paragraph says this:

Categories that make allegations about sexuality—such as "closeted homosexuals" or "people suspected of being gay"—are not acceptable under any circumstances. If such a category is created, it should be immediately depopulated and deleted. Note that as similar categories of this type have actually been attempted in the past, they may be speedily deleted (as a G4) and do not require another debate at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.

Why is this not applicable? Why shouldn't I just speedily delete? Why is this discussion going on anyway, and why am I even in it? Bruce leverett (talk) 14:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That guidance dates from an era when there was a much thinner consensus for any categories for LGBTQ people at all. I don't think it is overkill to have a discussion on the merits every couple decades or so (though participation is of course not mandatory). Given that there was no consensus three years ago to delete Category:Historical figures with ambiguous or disputed gender identity, there is a significant question whether a broad interpretation of CATLGBT to long-dead figures still accurately reflects consensus.--Trystan (talk) 15:44, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The guidance actually dates from 2009. I have not found, and don't know where to look for, discussions that led to that guidance being added, or subsequent discussions of it on its merits. If you are claiming that it is outdated, the burden of proof is on you.

Just looking at the population of the "disputed gender identity" category and this "disputed sexuality" category suggests that they are not closely comparable. For example, disputed gender identity was certainly defining for James Barry (surgeon); as pointed out in the early discussion of that category, it was a major contributor to his notability. But the "disputed sexuality" category is full of celebrities: Joan of Arc, Edward II, Leonardo da Vinci, Frederick the Great, James Buchanan, Abraham Lincoln, Alberto Santos-Dumont, J. Edgar Hoover, Adolf Hitler. Ambiguous/disputed sexuality is defining for all these worthies? For any of them? Bruce leverett (talk) 01:58, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The coverage of the sexuality of, e.g., Edward II, Frederick the Great, and James VI and I is substantial, well-sourced and WP:DUE. This is an aspect of those subjects that is commonly and consistently addressed by reliable sources, to the extent that the absence of a corresponding category would be a conspicuous deficiency. --Trystan (talk) 14:03, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not only that. If they were living today, they would be easily categorized as LGBTQ without any necessity for a "disputed category", even when they are anti-LGBTQ themselves, simply because they are in same-sex relationships, being immediately categorized as LGBTQ. Web-julio (talk) 06:44, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I agree with Trystan, this fills a void in the category system. Dimadick (talk) 12:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:French troubadours

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. Thorough discussion; unlikely a WP:RELIST would help. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:French troubadours to Category:Troubadours from France

Category:12th-century French troubadours to Category:12th-century troubadours from France

Category:13th-century French troubadours to Category:13th-century troubadours from France

Category:14th-century French troubadours to Category:14th-century troubadours from France

Category:Spanish troubadours to Category:Troubadours from Spain

Category:12th-century Spanish troubadours to Category:12th-century troubadours from Spain

Category:13th-century Spanish troubadours to Category:13th-century troubadours from Spain

Category:14th-century Spanish troubadours to Category:14th-century troubadours from Spain

Category:Italian troubadours to Category:Troubadours from Italy

Category:12th-century Italian troubadours to Category:12th-century troubadours from Italy

Category:13th-century Italian troubadours to Category:13th-century troubadours from Italy

Nominator's rationale: The troubadours wrote in Occitan, not French (or Spanish or Italian). They are defined by the language they used. The current category names are confusing. The equivalent of a troubadour writing in French is a trouvère. The problem is the ambiguity of the terms "French", "Spanish" and "Italian". It is absolutely non-obvious that they are non-linguistic terms in cases like this where they modify a literary term like "troubadour". Srnec (talk) 01:09, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I don't think that its non-obvious that these are nationalities. The norm for FOOian occupation is nationality, not language. I think that it would be better to create a language tree. French-language troubadours etc. or Category:12th-century French-language troubadours or something to that effect. And, frankly, I'd rather not have to rewrite the brand new {{Troubadours by nationality and century category header}} Mason (talk) 03:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are no French-language troubadours. Srnec (talk) 03:57, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You know what the point I'm trying to make is. There are traveling poets etc in different languages. There's a category called Galician-Portuguese troubadours, that describes both the language and the occupation. That could be a full tree. Mason (talk) 23:17, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, a troubadour wrote in Occitan, so obviously these must be nationality categories, there is no ambiguity about that. One might argue that it is a trivial intersection but a rename does not solve that. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:37, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That there is only one right way to read it does not mean it is unambiguous. Srnec (talk) 20:07, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Criminals from Fort Lauderdale, Florida

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:33, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:Criminals from Fort Lauderdale, Florida to Category:Criminals from Florida and Category:People from Fort Lauderdale, Florida

Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category. There's no need to diffuse by city. I'm also ok with deletion. Mason (talk) 00:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

October 18

Category:People by republican city or municipality in Latvia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:People by republican city or municipality in Latvia to Category:People by state city or municipality in Latvia

Nominator's rationale: rename, according to Administrative divisions of Latvia the correct name is state city. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Reformed Christianity

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 25#Reformed Christianity

Category:Lists of concert tours

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:04, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Lists of concert tours to Category:Lists of concerts and performances

Nominator's rationale: Both categories seem to perform the same function... both categories have the same type of content, both categories are a mix of "List of X concerts and performances", some "List of X concerts tours", some "List of X live performances"... all the same content with just different wording for the article titles.

When merging, I would also propose moving the following subcat so it is consistent with existing subcats in the destination cat:
Category:Lists of concert tours of South Korean artists → Category:Lists of concerts and performances of South Korean artists RachelTensions (talk) 17:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RachelTensions: do you mean merging Category:Lists of concerts and performances only to Category:Lists of concert tours? Merging the category to itself is probably not your intention. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes thank you, fixed. RachelTensions (talk) 18:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Speedrunning communities to Category:Speedrunning

Nominator's rationale: This isn't because the category's small, but because it isn't being 100% clear with the definition of community and besides, just looks a like small yet unorganized mess. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 00:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, at most TheSpeedGamers might be called a community but even that is doubtful. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Hartshead to Category:People from Kirklees (district)

Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation as contains only a single article. Merge to larger parent. AusLondonder (talk) 00:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Hamstall Ridware to Category:People from Lichfield District

Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation as contains only a single article. Merge to larger parent. AusLondonder (talk) 00:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:25, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:06, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Doveridge to Category:People from Derbyshire Dales (district)

Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation as contains only a single article. Merge to larger parent. AusLondonder (talk) 00:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:25, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Only 1 entry. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 08:26, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. I couldn't find any others. Perspicax (talk) 09:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:2028 United States Senate elections

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:06, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:2028 United States Senate elections (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Created too soon, a category full of 34 redirects to the same page. Unhelpful for readers. AusLondonder (talk) 00:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This again? I don't see how deletion is any better for our readers, but whatever. Elli (talk | contribs) 00:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How is keeping a category of 34 redirects to the same page helpful for our readers? AusLondonder (talk) 10:56, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this is too premature. By all means recreate when there are at least a handful real articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:27, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 25#Category:Mosques of Leicestershire

October 17

Category:Esports techniques

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 25#Category:Esports techniques

Category:User-specific file copyright templates

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:User custom license tags. (non-admin closure) Cremastra (u — c) 23:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:User-specific file copyright templates (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:User custom license tags

Nominator's rationale: Single-member category for an unused userspace template. Merge it to Category:User custom license tags. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra — talk — c 20:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:05, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:World Series at Yankee Stadium

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:57, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:World Series at Yankee Stadium (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE. All of the articles are already in the appropriate subcategories so merging is not necessary. User:Namiba 18:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging User:Carguychris, User:Marcocapelle, User:Smasongarrison and User:RevelationDirect who commented on the Events at Yankee Stadium discussion as this is directly related.--User:Namiba 18:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This category is justifiable from the considerable amount of coverage noting how many World Series are at Yankee Stadium (esp. the 1923-2009 one). It may not be a justifiable category for other baseball stadiums but it is for this one. _pbp 18:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OCVENUE does not make an exception for the amount of coverage. This information is better presented as prose in the articles about the stadiums and the team. Carguychris (talk) 14:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Additionally, there are two Yankee Stadiums—the present one and the historical one—and the category confusingly doesn't differentiate between them. Carguychris (talk) 14:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator.Lost in Quebec (talk) 14:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Marvel Cinematic Universe music

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Marvel Cinematic Universe music to Category:Music of the Marvel Cinematic Universe

Nominator's rationale: C2D: Consistency with Music of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Trailblazer101 (talk) 17:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Seems reasonable.★Trekker (talk) 17:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom – ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 23:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Members of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre

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

The result of the discussion was: reverse merge. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:59, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Members of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre to Category:Knights of the Holy Sepulchre

Nominator's rationale: This category is superfluous. If you're a member, you're a knight, and vice versa. M.O.X (talk) 09:05, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Downmerge or reverse merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
’’’Oppose’’’ The Order consists of both knights, nuns and laywomen, several of whom are listed under this category. (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel the Monk (talk • contribs) 14:14, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Daniel the Monk's objection?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 12:52, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is a fair point, there are also dames next to knights. So there are two solutions: reverse merge, or split between knights and dames. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:00, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I support a reverse merge. M.O.X (talk) 03:07, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Knights of the Holy Sepulchre.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 17:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Botswana constituencies in Selebi-Phikwe

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:57, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Botswana constituencies in Selebi-Phikwe to Category:Constituencies in the Central District (Botswana)

Nominator's rationale: There is no parent category for Selebi-Phikwe, so this is not a useful subcat of the district parent. – Fayenatic London 14:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Or else (second choice) rename and reparent to Category:Selebi-Phikwe and add the eponymous article and BCL Limited to it. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:08, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Elk and red deer

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:57, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Elk and red deer to Category:Cervus

Nominator's rationale: This conflates two Cervus species. Splitting them as suggested at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_October_9#Category:Elk_and_red_deer could be confusing, as sub-species Kansu red deer and Tibetan red deer are Cervus canadensis (elk) rather than Cervus elaphus (red deer). Central Asian red deer may also be a separate species (its 3 subspecies also have articles), but there does not seem to be scientific consensus on that yet. Upmerging as suggested by the previous CFD closer Debresser may be best. – Fayenatic London 11:11, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as per nom. No need for this category per discussion. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Prohibition-era gangsters

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 both into Category:American gangsters of the interwar period. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Depression-era gangsters to Category:Depression-era gangsters

Nominator's rationale: These are really overlapping categories. Does anyone have ideas for how to make these two categories more distinct, or perhaps combine them? For the record. Prohibition in the united states was from Jan 17, 1920 – Dec 5, 1933, whereas the great depression was from 1929 to 1939ish. Mason (talk) 02:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

comment Merging in this way does not seem to be the answer, as it is not true that all Category:Depression-era gangsters also were active in the Depression era. Perhaps, someone can make a count of the actual overlap of articles, not just the time period overlaps. thanks Hmains (talk) 02:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is only four years of overlap but both are very short periods to categorize people by. So I support the merge in principle but then it should probably become Category:Gangsters of the interwar period. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't "interwar" lose the implication of "American" that both "Prohibition" and "Depression" have? Maybe it should be Category:American gangsters of the interwar period. jlwoodwa (talk) 14:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Of course, you are completely right. The same thing also applies to the current Category:Depression-era gangsters. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  What about Category:Prohibition and Great Depression gangsters? AHI-3000 (talk) 21:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Then at least it should become Category:Prohibition-era and American Great Depression-era gangsters or Category:American Prohibition-era and Great Depression-era gangsters, but Category:American gangsters of the interwar period is a lot shorter. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:42, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison: What category was originally nominated? It is currently listed as attempting to merge the (untagged) Category:Depression-era gangsters into itself. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Prohibition-era gangsters was nominated first. My apologies i must have mangled it when I added the 2nd category Mason (talk) 02:11, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Depression-era gangsters. Consensus seems to favor merging that and Category:Prohibition-era gangsters into a new category; what should that category be called?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't hate Category:American gangsters of the interwar period. And think it does a good job of covering the defining features. I think we'll need a category description to help contextualize the category. Mason (talk) 19:47, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Ugandan dermatologists to Category:Ugandan physicians
Propose merging Category:Ugandan rheumatologists to Category:Ugandan physicians
Propose merging Category:Ugandan radiologists to Category:Ugandan physicians

Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry LibStar (talk) 01:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge, also to e.g. Category:Dermatologists. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Fictional characters who can manipulate reality

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Fictional characters who can manipulate reality (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Way too vague of a category. I can manipulate reality just by picking up a piece of paper, since the paper is part of reality and I'm changing it. I suggest upmerging its more specific subcategories, however, this deletion does not imply deleting those too. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree on the category's vagueness. When deleted, then at least the subcategories should be moved to Category:Fictional superhumans by ability. Not sure what to do with the articles though. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They should likely just be removed from the category if it's deleted. In a lot of cases they may or may not belong in it anyway. For example, Elizabeth from Bioshock - does she "change" reality or just teleport objects from other realities? Such powers are hard to quantify, and can just lead to misinforming readers if people attempt to do so. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, fair enough. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:10, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This sounds like it's meant to be for characters covered by TV Tropes' "Reality Warper" item, but the description is incredibly vague and full of technobabble:
–LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:46, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

October 16

Category:Urdu-language women writers

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

The result of the discussion was: no consensus. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 18:56, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Urdu-language women writers to Category:Urdu-language writers

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between language, gender, and occupation, per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 13:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principle but disperse the articles between Category:Urdu-language writers from India and Category:Urdu-language writers from Pakistan. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:06, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose being a woman writer is WP:DEF. NLeeuw (talk) 17:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on NL's objection?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that's the not question. The intersection is gender with language and occupation. I don't think this meets the criteria for EGRS, and there are no other categories at this intersection. @Nederlandse Leeuw do you have evidence to the contrary that Urdu-language women writers meet the criteria at the intersection? Aka is the "combination [] itself recognized as a defining topic that has already been established (in reliable sources showing substantial existing research specific to the topic), as academically or culturally significant in its own right"? Mason (talk) 02:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About 49.300 results for "women urdu writers" in Google Scholar. Just to highlight a few:

The Role of Female Writers in the Promotion of Popular Literature in Urdu.
Women Reading/Women Writing: Anxiety and Āzādī in Twentieth Century Urdu Pulp Fiction
Female Voices: Women Writers in Hyderabad at the Beginning of the Twentieth Century: there has been a whole movement of female writers in Urdu, both of poetry and of prose
Images of Women in Urdu Novels Written by Muslim Women: An Analysis from A Feminist Perspective
Articulation, agency and embodiment in contemporary Pakistani Urdu poetry by women
Urdu women's magazines in the early twentieth century
Urban Women Rebels: Voices of Dissent in Urdu Popular Fiction
Feminine or Patriarchal: Story of Adam and Eve in Urdu Novels by Women Writers

Etc.

Also plenty of Google Books, e.g.

The Language They Chose: Women's Writing in Urdu Vol I: Fiction
The Language They Chose: Women's Writing in Urdu Vol II: Non-Fiction
Women's Writings from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh: The Worlds of Bangla and Urdu
Parwaaz: A Selection of Urdu Short Stories by Women
Portrayals of Women in Pakistan: An Analysis of Fahmīdah Riyāẓ’s Urdu Poetry

Etc.

So yes @Smasongarrison, I think I might have some evidence. Arguably, it's high time that this topic received its own stand-alone article. NLeeuw (talk) 05:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on NL's response?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:35, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per NL Mach61 14:06, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:LGBTQ-related suicides

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 18:56, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:LGBTQ-related suicides to Category:LGBTQ people who died by suicide

Nominator's rationale: The current title may be misleading implying that all those people died due to LGBTQ issues. Some of them, however, committed suicide for other reasons, such as Alexander McQueen. Proposed title would also be consistent with the Foo who died by suicide scheme: Category:College students who died by suicide‎, Category:People who died by suicide in prison custody‎, etc. Brandmeister^talk 08:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, it would not surprise me if the category was originally meant to be about suicides due to LGBTQ issues. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am not seeing objection to the rename, regardless of if it represents a change in the category's scope or not. In other words: If you object to the new name (and the potential new scope), please speak up :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To relister's comment: it is correct that I am not opposing the nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:21, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Louisville Black Caps (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Louisville White Sox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only one category layer. Both are basically the same team but changed their names. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I created these categories. The rationale for deletion may be sound but it would be useful to know what the post-deletion cleanup would look like. Is this an argument to have a single category name to cover both team names? Would this leave the players categories dangling? I just would like to know where this is going. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 19:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@StefenTower, the player categories are in Category:Negro league baseball players and Category:Baseball players in Kentucky by team. Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:20, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'm aware of that but deleting removes them from the structure that goes up to Category:Baseball teams in Louisville, Kentucky which is under Category:Baseball in Louisville, Kentucky. A user traversing that structure might not run into the player categories. Thus, my !vote to Combine below. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 23:18, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, having the subcat in Category:Baseball players in Kentucky by team suffices in these cases. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:58, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Combine. As they are practically the same team, it would be useful to combine these into one category (e.g. Category:Louisville Black Caps and White Sox), and continue as a child of Category:Baseball teams in Louisville, Kentucky. Otherwise, the team articles would have to be added to that category, with the fallout of losing subcategories of the team's players under both names in that structure. A deletion wouldn't be catastrophic, but I think combining is more optimal. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 23:12, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The normal CFD jargon for "combine" is "merge". Is merging an acceptable alternative?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't follow the combine proposal. If that is the way forward then the players categories should be combined too and we still do not need a parent category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, per WP:Baseball, if the team name changes then a new category is created for the new name. So player categories shouldn't be combined. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:33, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, but then parent categories should not be combined either I guess? Marcocapelle (talk) 21:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's question?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably the "combine" thread is entirely moot by now. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, sorry for such a late response. No they shouldn't be and there certainly is no precedent for it. Its worth noting too that it was a team that was around for less than three years and there is little known about it. Even if its combined, it will still only have two categories and one article. Deletion is the best approach. Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by fighter aircraft shootdowns

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. A merge nomination might find consensus. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:15, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by fighter aircraft shootdowns to Category:Aircraft shootdown incidents involving fighter aircraft

Nominator's rationale: Category name seems self-contradictory or even oxymoronic, and inherently implies a cause. Shootdowns are typically intentional acts and not accidents; in the rare occurrences in which aircraft have been shot down under circumstances that may be truly accidental, considerable controversy typically exists, and blanket categorization implying a cause could be a violation of WP:NPOV. Proposed category name is less subjective. Carguychris (talk) 16:53, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose rename. This is inconsistent with the rest of the category tree. Mason (talk) 21:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This CFD and the aforementioned "missile shootdown" category effectively created a branch of Category:Aviation accidents and incidents that duplicates Category:Aircraft shootdown incidents. These incidents only need to be listed in one category tree, and the "shootdown incidents" tree existed first; these new "shootdowns" branches of the "accidents and incidents" tree are redundant and should be deleted. Pardon my failure to mention that in the initial proposal. Carguychris (talk) 23:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:22, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Airliner shootdown incidents. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by missile shootdowns

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Aircraft shootdown incidents. (non-admin closure) Cremastra (u — c) 22:57, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by missile shootdowns (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category name seems self-contradictory or even oxymoronic, and inherently implies a cause. Shootdowns are typically intentional acts and not accidents; in the rare occurrences in which aircraft have been shot down under circumstances that may be truly accidental, considerable controversy typically exists, and blanket categorization implying a cause could be a violation of WP:NPOV. Carguychris (talk) 16:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. "accidents and incidents " includes non-accidents. Please suggest an alternative name if you dislike it. Mason (talk) 21:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aircraft shootdown incidents already exists, so this branch of Category:Aviation accidents and incidents seems redundant. Suggest Category:Aircraft shootdown incidents involving surface-to-air missiles. (It is unclear whether the creator of this subcategory intended to restrict it to SAM shootdowns, but the only article currently in the category is a SAM shootdown, and I would argue that in air-to-air or fighter shootdowns, the weapon used is non-defining.) Carguychris (talk) 21:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Carguychris: shouldn't this category be merged to Category:Aircraft shootdown incidents rather than deleted? Marcocapelle (talk) 02:56, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did not make that clear in the original post. This CFD and the similarly named "fighter aircraft shootdowns" category effectively created a branch of Category:Aviation accidents and incidents that duplicates Category:Aircraft shootdown incidents. These incidents only need to be listed in one category tree, and the "shootdown incidents" tree existed first; these new "shootdowns" branches of the "accidents and incidents" tree are redundant and should be deleted. Carguychris (talk) 11:54, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:22, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Aircraft shootdown incidents. This is a single-entry small category. It's ridiculous that we've spent two relists bickering over what to name it. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:47, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Pppery. Unhelpful for navigation. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:17, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Airliner bombings in the United States

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:20, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Airliner bombings in the United States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Violates WP:OCLOCATION and WP:NARROWCAT; the absolute number of airliner bombings is too small to warrant subdividing, it's unlikely to grow substantially in the future, and the country where a bombing took place is not a central defining characteristic. OCLOCATION dictates that countries of occurrence may be useful for dividing up huge and unwieldy categories, but this isn't one of them, and is unlikely to ever be. Carguychris (talk) 19:00, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

keep Nomination does not consider the effect of this deletion on Category:Improvised explosive device bombings in the United States where this will result in declining navigation abilities to get to quickly see those articles about IEDs involving aircraft in the United States. Hmains (talk) 19:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I considered that. There are only about twenty listings in that category. Adding nine more should not make the category unwieldy, and since the articles are all named "<airline name> <flight number>", it's obvious which ones are airliner bombings. Carguychris (talk) 19:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably this is meant to merge Category:Airliner bombings in the United States to Category:Airliner bombings rather than delete. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Carguychris (talk) 21:28, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge for now, with the very uneven distribution between countries, a diffusion by country currently does not make too much sense. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a numbers game here. Categories are created to aid readers in their navigation to articles. Putting all the articles into Category:Improvised explosive device bombings in the United States with no subcat showing these are airliner bombing is not helpful, is not an improvement, is not moving forward. Airliner bombings here should be kept on an equal footing in Category:Improvised explosive device bombings in the United States with Category:Building bombings in the United States and Category:Car and truck bombings in the United States as they are without thinking about WP. Category:Airliner bombings in the United States articles are all named, as stated above "<airline name> <flight number>", it's obvious which ones are airliner bombings." Once merged, however, it is NOT at all obvious that these articles are about airliners being bombed. We only know this from the category name: Category:Airliner bombings in the United States and categories and their names are another important component of WP, not something to be tossed around and deleted freely. Hmains (talk) 01:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Hmains's most recent comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment. Thoughts on Hmains's latest comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:21, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was: triple merge. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:01, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Defunct airlines of Réunion to Category:Defunct airlines of France

Nominator's rationale: Category contains a single page, unhelpful for navigation. Propose merge to Category:Defunct airlines of France. AusLondonder (talk) 20:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about the other parent Category:Defunct airlines of Africa? Perspicax (talk) 23:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Dual~~ triple merge per above discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updated vote per Fayenatic london below. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:10, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge per above discussion. Suggest follow-up CfM for

Category:Defunct airlines of Mauritius (1P) and other underpopulated child cats of Category:Defunct airlines of Africa like Eritrea, South Sudan and Somalia.

Category:Defunct airlines of Europe: Faroe Islands‎ (1 P); Guernsey‎ (1 P); Belarus‎ (2 P); Montenegro‎ (1 P)

Category:Defunct airlines of Asia by country: East Timor‎ (2 P); Kuwait‎ (2 P); Mongolia‎ (2 P); Oman‎ (1 P); Syria‎ (1 P)

NLeeuw (talk) 06:37, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Triple merge to Category:Defunct airlines of France, Category:Defunct airlines of Africa and Category:Airlines of Overseas France. Consequently, delete Category:Defunct airlines of Overseas France and Category:Defunct companies of Overseas France as empty (see related Guadeloupe nomination below). – Fayenatic London 11:53, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dual merge per discussion above. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:09, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ratnahastin: What is your rationale for removing the contents from Category:Airlines of Overseas France, please? – Fayenatic London 10:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Defunct airlines of Overseas France and Category:Defunct companies of Overseas France. Triple merge and delete these two categories, as suggested by FL?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:11, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was: triple merge. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:05, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Defunct airlines of Guadeloupe to Category:Defunct airlines of France

Nominator's rationale: Category contains a single page, unhelpful for navigation. Propose merge to Category:Defunct airlines of France and Category:Defunct airlines of the Caribbean. AusLondonder (talk) 20:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Dual~~ triple merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:41, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updated vote per Fayenatic london below. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Triple merge to Category:Defunct airlines of France, Category:Defunct airlines of the Caribbean and Category:Airlines of Overseas France. Consequently, delete Category:Defunct airlines of Overseas France and Category:Defunct companies of Overseas France as empty. – Fayenatic London 11:51, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dual merge per discussion above. Ratnahastin (talk) 04:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ratnahastin: What is your rationale for removing the contents from Category:Airlines of Overseas France, please? – Fayenatic London 10:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Category:Defunct airlines of Réunion lower down on the page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:33, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:The Wild Thornberrys films

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:The Wild Thornberrys films to Category:The Wild Thornberrys

Nominator's rationale: Only contains two articles. Fails WP:NARROWCAT. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:35, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Crigglestone to Category:People from the City of Wakefield

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 14:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:36, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Bounds Green to Category:People from the London Borough of Haringey

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:36, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Bamber Bridge to Category:People from South Ribble (district)

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:40, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Anderton, Lancashire to Category:People from the Borough of Chorley

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Polgooth to Category:People from Cornwall

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Manaccan to Category:People from Cornwall

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:18, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:History of Yugoslavia to Category:Yugoslavia

Nominator's rationale: Because Yugoslavia is a historical topic as such, this title is redundant, all this should simply be upmerged into the parent category, there's no apparent benefit in having the readers do an extra click. Joy (talk) 06:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NB: if there's actual historiography topics that should be categorized, we should make a Category:Historiography of Yugoslavia for that. --Joy (talk) 07:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree The "History of Yugoslavia" category is one of about 20 country categories in Category:History of Europe by former country and there are more “Histories of former countries in the “other continent” countries. Hence it should not be deleted or upmerged. Hugo999 (talk) 08:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean look at the content of the category, it's a handful of vaguely appropriate articles and subcategories, the core historical content is meager. None of this would do worse if it was directly in Category:Yugoslavia, and would save a click for whoever is browsing the category tree

Other examples may or may not be similar: for example, the Soviet Union's category has at least some historiographical stuff under it, and in turn a main space article History of the Soviet Union. On the other hand, History of Yugoslavia was upmerged into Yugoslavia fifteen years ago and it's doubtful there's a need to split it out as a whole (individual periods already have separate articles).

Surely the point of the category tree isn't just nice and orderly existence, rather it's to get people reading more of the encyclopedia. I don't quite see how this would be helping that, it seems more like a small obstacle. --Joy (talk) 15:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, not all former countries have a history category so we should check this case by case. In this case, after applying WP:SUBCAT, the parent category will contain only two subcategories and two articles more than before the merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:54, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Articles on pre-1900 earthquakes

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 18:57, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Articles on pre-1900 earthquakes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: No longer used in Template:Infobox earthquake and was added in 2018 at Talk:List_of_historical_earthquakes#Proposal_to_redefine_as_"before_1900"_(not_1901) and was removed from the template in 2019. See more discussion. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is still an article AD 17 Lydia earthquake in the category, how did that happen? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's supposed to be a tracking category but hasn't been tracked by anything since 2019. The only member AD 17 Lydia earthquake was added manually with [[Category:Articles on pre-1900 earthquakes]]. The article is already in the non-tracking Category:1st-millennium earthquakes where it belongs. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per PrimeHunter. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Second ladies and gentlemen of the Philippines

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 24#Category:Second ladies and gentlemen of the Philippines

Early abbots by century

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 24#Early abbots by century

Category:Society of Ukrainian Progressors members

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 24#Category:Society of Ukrainian Progressors members

October 15

Category:Pilot intake jet fighter

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

The result of the discussion was: procedural close, the category has already been deleted (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 05:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Pilot intake jet fighter (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Contested speedy deletion. This category is an apparent recreation of a previously deleted category, the terminology used is nonsense and would be a non-defining feature in any case. The creator of both categories appears to be using two accounts. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:46, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at project level here. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:55, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - nonsense name that implies the fighter intakes the pilot (like through the engine and out the other side?). Non-defining and previous discussions were against a similarly named category for the same context. Canterbury Tail talk 19:56, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Canterbury Tail. Carguychris (talk) 20:20, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete - I nominated it for WP:G4, but the creator has contested. This is merely a recreation of Category:Nose-mounted intake jet fighter with even worse terminology, not that correct terminology would change its WP:TRIVIALCAT status. - ZLEA _T\^C 20:44, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The name does not even make logical sense. And recreation of an already deleted category on top of that. --McSly (talk) 20:49, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination and what Canterbury Tail said. ‹hamster717🐉› ^{(discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠)} 21:02, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:National Hockey League in the Sun Belt

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. – Fayenatic London 11:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:National Hockey League in the Sun Belt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The Sun Belt is an imprecise term for the southern and western United States. There is no accompanying Category:Sports in the Sun Belt. User:Namiba 17:49, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not a defining characteristic and there isn't an article National Hockey League in the Sun Belt either. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, ambiguous and non-defining. Carguychris (talk) 14:25, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:National Hockey League in Alberta

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. – Fayenatic London 11:24, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:National Hockey League in Alberta (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: A small category which does not aid navigation. Both articles are already in appropriate subcategories. User:Namiba 17:42, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:07, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:National Hockey League in Winnipeg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. – Fayenatic London 13:46, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:National Hockey League in Manitoba to Category:Ice hockey teams in Winnipeg
Propose merging Category:National Hockey League in Winnipeg to Category:Ice hockey teams in Winnipeg

Nominator's rationale: Duplicative, contains only 2 categories, and generally hinders navigation. User:Namiba 17:32, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:07, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 airlines of the Northern Mariana Islands

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

The result of the discussion was: triple merge. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 17:02, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Defunct airlines of the Northern Mariana Islands to Category:Defunct airlines of Oceania

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article. Unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge, also to Category:Airlines of the Northern Mariana Islands. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:16, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Why not also Category:Defunct airlines of insular areas of the United States? – Fayenatic London 13:51, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - You are right, should be a triple merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:24, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. – Fayenatic London 13:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Egyptian Royalty (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: New category that duplicates the existing Category:Egyptian monarchs tree. AusLondonder (talk) 11:02, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, it is not even sure if the subject of the article should be considered to be royalty. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Human resource management books

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

The result of the discussion was: split/dual merge. (non-admin closure) Cremastra (u — c) 01:08, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:Human resource management books to Category:Human resource management publications and Category:Management books

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one page in here and no other books in Human resource management publications Mason (talk) 02:52, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Strange World (film)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. – Fayenatic London 13:54, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Strange World (film) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: A category for the film with its only articles being the film itself and its soundtrack is a bit overkill and unnecessary. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 02:26, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, the articles are already directly interlinked. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:32, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no need for a category this small. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:54, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:The Legend of Qin characters

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. – Fayenatic London 13:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:The Legend of Qin characters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: An AfD in 2017 resulted in the redirect of articles for characters from this series to the list that remains as the sole entry in this category. This category is no longer warranted. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 02:16, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 people who self-identify as being of Native American descent

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

The result of the discussion was: no consensus. This is a charged discussion, and I would like to first say that for the most part it was kept civil. Some principles I have applied when assessing consensus include WP:OWN – membership in a WikiProject or being of Native American descent yourself does not give your voice any additional weight. Whether Wikipedia should give groups more say over how they are described in Wikipedia is a difficult question, but changing that is far beyond the scope of this discussion. I have also discounted any concerns about the timing of this discussion: The previous CFD is over a year old, and consensus can change. That being said, there is no consensus to delete this category or its subcategories. (If editors have concerns over a particular subcategory, I do not see this discussion as barring a nomination of individual subcategories for concerns particular to that subcategory.) However, there is again no consensus for outright deletion. Arguments in favor of deleting the categories asserted BLP issues, which is obviously a very strong argument. This was rebutted by implicit references to WP:ABOUTSELF. Beyond that argument, there is really not much to go off of – supporters of deletion argued that we do not have other self-ID categories. Supporters of keeping appealed to the fact that being Indigenous is a unique status. The numbers are also fairly close – by my count, 14 people supported deleting the categories and 10 opposed deletion. Close numbers and even arguments mean there is no consensus to delete this category or its subcategories. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Failed verification and WP:NONDEF issues. I checked several articles at random and most do not support the source of the claim of Native American descent being "self-identification" or that the individuals have not "shared proof of this heritage" (proof is not mentioned). The insinuation here is that these people are not genuinely of Native American descent but sources don't support (or contradict) that. As for some self-sourced claims of descent being false, that is true for all other types of descent but we justifiably don't have Category:People who self-identify as being of Sephardic Jewish descent. Furthermore, people saying "I'm Native American" in an interview, if they lack a genuine connection to Native American culture, is never going to meet the standard for categorization in WP:NONDEF. (t · c) buidhe 21:19, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe, ~~I agree that these should be deleted per nom but definitely nominate all the subcategories too.~~ Per the below discussion, I'm changing my vote to neutral for now. Was not aware of a previous discussion on this. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:59, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural oppose. This was the subject of a very long CFD, the contributors of which should be pinged. Mason (talk) 22:49, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't realize that there had been a prior CfD but the result is hard to reconcile with the P&G. Seems like a better solution to the identified problem might to be enforcing existing wp:defining rules or even eliminating Native American categories by descent that aren't for registered tribal members. The situation as it is now feels like Wikipedia trying to decide who is proven to be a real Native American or not—which the sources, in the vast majority of cases, don't allow us to do. (t · c) buidhe 02:54, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, it's unclear to me what differentiates this category tree from the People of Native American descent tree. Articles like Tiffany Darwish seem like they could be placed into either. What type of source is required to declare Native American identity "proven" rather than a mater of "self-identification"? (t · c) buidhe 02:59, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many people are of descent and not enrolled tribal citizens but this is still a defined aspect of their biography. The point of this broad category is that Wikipedia is *not* trying to decide who is or is not of Native ancestry but reflecting what published, sources state: that these individuals have stated they have Native ancestry in their published biographies. What would move someone into just the "descent" category would be confirmation from the tribe, which might come in the form of their parent being a tribal citizen. User:Netherzone created List of Indigenous newspapers in North America, which helps make it easier to find tribal newspapers. Yuchitown (talk) 22:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that almost all articles in the category fail verification as it is currently drafted. This is a problematic category, especially for BLPs. It is a subcat of Category:American people who self-identify as being of Indigenous descent, which makes the stronger claim that the indivudals have no proof of the heritage. (Previous parent categories put everyone in this category under Category:Native American cultural appropriation and Category:Transracial (identity), but those at least have been removed.) It is of limited use to have a category that groups together known frauds, people who have a genuine but incorrect belief that they have Indigenous ancestry, and people who do have Indigenous ancestry but a particular standard of proof hasn't been found in reliable sources.--Trystan (talk) 04:32, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG DELETE Goldendragonfly77 (talk) 20:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per nom Goldendragonfly77 (talk) 21:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

strong delete - This hostility towards state/informally recognizes Tribes has caused significant harm to our community, and we believe it is imperative to address this issue promptly and effectively by strong delete of this category.

The Herring Pond Wampanoag Tribe, a first contact Tribe the predates the federal government is located in Plymouth Massachusetts and has a rich history documented history and a cultural heritage that is integral to not only the formation of this country, but to our identity and well-being. The Wikipedia pages created purposely by these editors to cause further harm while we were prevented from creating it due to conflict of interest. Our dedicated pages should serve as a vital resource for educating the public about our history, traditions, and contributions. Unfortunately, the recent assaults on these pages have resulted in the dissemination of misinformation, the erasure of important historical facts, and the misrepresentation of our Tribe.

Additionally, it has come to our attention that the pages of other state-recognized tribes have also been sabotaged by certain editors. This pattern of behavior is deeply troubling and highlights a broader issue of systemic bias and hostility towards state-recognized tribes on Wikipedia. The deliberate alteration and removal of accurate information from these pages not only disrespects the affected tribes but also undermines the credibility and reliability of Wikipedia as a source of information.

It is important to emphasize that the sovereignty of Indigenous tribes is inherent and not granted by the federal government. Sovereignty is a fundamental aspect of our identity and existence as Indigenous peoples. The federal government does not have the authority to determine who is or is not Indigenous. This principle is crucial to understanding the legitimacy and rights of state-recognized and unrecognized tribes. The actions of certain editors on Wikipedia to label us as self-identified undermines this inherent sovereignty by attempting to erase or delegitimize our status and history.

These actions have several detrimental effects:

Erosion of Cultural Integrity: The deliberate alteration and removal of accurate information undermine the integrity of our cultural narrative. This not only disrespects our ancestors but also distorts the understanding of our heritage for future generations.

Damage to Reputation: The spread of false information damages our tribe's reputation and credibility. It creates confusion and mistrust among those seeking to learn about our community, including researchers, educators, and the general public.

Emotional and Psychological Impact: The continuous attacks on our pages have caused emotional distress within our community. Seeing our history and identity misrepresented is deeply hurtful and demoralizing.

Barrier to Advocacy and Support: Accurate information on Wikipedia is crucial for our advocacy efforts. It helps us secure funding, support, and recognition for our initiatives. The sabotage of our pages hinders these efforts and affects our ability to effectively advocate for our rights and needs.

Weesôus8ee Ahp8tashqônâhs (Golden Dragonfly)

Herring Pond Wampanoag Tribe

128 Herring Pond Road

Plymouth, MA 02360 Goldendragonfly77 (talk) 22:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong support deletion. These categories fall foul of WP:OPINIONCAT and WP:NONDEF. There are no convincing, policy-based reasons to keep these categories, and looking at them (and the text on the individual pages) makes it clear these are used for WP:POV pushing in violation of WP:BLP. Even the wording "self-identify" is arguably non-neutral in this case. Lewisguile (talk) 19:48, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural oppose per Mason. There was very fierce opposition at the time. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:53, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will ping all participants at the previous CFD. I will also note (without comment) that since the previous discussion, ArbCom has passed a motion stating that Mark Ironie and CorbieVreccan (who both participated in the prior CFD) are to be considered a single user.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:28, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Brandmeister, CorbieVreccan, Dimadick, Indigenous girl, Jjj1238, Koavf, Marcocapelle, Mark Ironie, Moxy, Namiba, Place Clichy, Qwerfjkl, RevelationDirect, TheMainLogan, ValarianB, and Yuchitown: Pinging previous participants, regardless of participation in the above discussion. I have no opinion on the merits of the proposal. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion the category was created because of the very specific and nuanced differences between claiming Native American heritage and claiming any other kind of heritage. There are numerous cases (as the amount of articles in the category suggests) where an individual's claim to Native American ancestry is relevant enough for inclusion, but they are not considered to be Native American by the Native American community because of the aforementioned nuances that exist here. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 02:39, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This comment does not engage with the deletion argument at all and should be disregarded by the closer. Unless there is more clarity about how the two sets of categories are distinguished in reliable sources and how we can verifiably distinguish them, there is no basis for categorization. You also haven't explained how people in this category meets the defining criteria. I wonder if there is even any evidence in reliable sources that native American heritage (as opposed to being an actual tribal member) is somehow distinct from all other ethnicities that it requires a different categorization scheme (t · c) buidhe 03:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Yes, this is often defining and also Native American is a unique political classification in the United States, not an ethnicity. Yuchitown (talk) 04:34, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. To expand further, these are longstanding categories based on self-identification (a term widely used in literature about Native American identity) by individuals in secondary, published sources. These are the broadest possible categories that reflect that the individual has claimed Native American ancestry. I hope everyone in this discussion have familiarized themselves with the topic of Native American identity in the United States, and how it is a unique political status that is not comparable to ethnic or racial classifications or other identity classifications, such as those of the LGBTQ communities. Being Native American is a communal identity, not an individual identity. While being a tribal citizen clearly requires confirmation from the tribe in question, being a descendant also requires confirmation and also has real-world implications (for instance, direct descendants of tribal citizens are still eligible to use the Indian Health Service, even if they aren't enrolled. Innumerable individuals make claims to Native American descendency, but often these claims are unsubstantiated so they go into this category or its subcategories. That doesn't mean they do *not* have Native American ancestry; it just means confirmation in reliable, secondary, published sources needed to recategorize them haven't been found yet. These are broad, Schrödinger's cat categories. Without them (and anyone here who has edited Native topics for years will know), these individuals repeated get added to the specific tribal categories (e.g. Category:Mohawk people) and repeatedly have to be removed. The name of this category is factually accurate and meets Wikipedia's requirements for what can be verified. Yuchitown (talk) 16:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oppose This is both defining and relatively easy to source. Dimadick (talk) 07:34, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That someone has made a claim of Native American ancestry is often easy to source. Where almost every article fails verification for this cateogry is in sourcing the claim that they have no proof of that ancestry (as the parent category words it), or that they have not shared such proof (as this category words it). Our failure to find a source making a certain claim can’t be used as verification for the claim that no such source exists; that is WP:OR, used here to make contentious claims about BLPs.--Trystan (talk) 12:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can't prove a negative. This larger, baseline category is for people who claim descent. If reliable, published sources confirmed descent, then the person moves to a smaller category. Yuchitown (talk) 22:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can't prove a negative. But that's the problem with the scope note as currently written; it claims an unproven negative (that they have no or have not shared proof). It then goes on to heavily cast aspersions on the subjects in the category ("In some cases, they make the claim despite having been proven to have no Native American heritage at all," and "See also: Pretendian"). The way you characterize the scope in your comment above is much more neutral, and it would go a long way to addressing the BLP concerns if the scope note were revised to say "This category lists notable citizens of the United States who claim to have some Native American ancestry. For individuals whose descent is confirmed by the tribe in question in reliable, published sources, use Category:American people of Native American descent."--Trystan (talk) 12:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn’t create this category, but I agree that it would be much better and more helpful to edit the description to be completely neutral. (I have done so with various subcats). Is it okay to make these edits now or wait until this discussion runs its course? Yuchitown (talk) 12:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I assume it would be fine to make the edits now, if there are no objections.--Trystan (talk) 13:45, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, neutral wording is better to implement now, rather than waiting. Lewisguile (talk) 19:30, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Listify I get the point of opposers, but because of apparent doubts in some (or many) of such claims, this is clearly WP:OPINIONCAT and hardly WP:DEFINING as compared to e.g. established Category:Native American people. Brandmeister^talk 08:11, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Inclusion here is not an opinion. All the people included in these categories have identified as being of Native American descent (generally or of a specific tribe, in which case they go under the appropriate subcat) in secondary, published records. Often that's all that can substantiated; that they include that in their biography. When tribes confirm their citizenship or descendancy in secondary, published sources, then they can be moved into the smaller categories. Yuchitown (talk) 16:25, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You say that, but the pages for these categories aren't anywhere near as neutral. Lewisguile (talk) 19:31, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Different Procedural Oppose Since the original nomination, there have been a number of subcategories which this parent category serves to group and shouldn't be deleted in isolation. (I do have concerns about most of the subcats though.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 08:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on Subcategories Two of these subcategories serve a clear purpose: The Cherokee heritage groups are why the Cherokee group is so large and descendants of multi-racial people who fibbed about their identity to utilize the Pocahontas exception to racial segregation justifies a subcategory. (The Category:American people who self-identify as being of Powhatan descent subcategory is misnamed though, since few would be able to name Pocahontas' tribe.) I'm less sure what the purpose is for all the other, mostly small, tribal categories though since the exotic sounding name of the tribe may have basically been picked at random. Occupational subcategories for actors and politicians dubiously claiming ancestry might be a better approach. - RevelationDirect (talk) 09:10, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These categories are based on how the individuals have self-identified in secondary, published sources and use the terminology they use. For instance, this article mentions Nadema Agard identifying being of "Powhatan" descent. Speculation, second-guessing, and original research isn't permitted on Wikipedia. Yuchitown (talk) 16:06, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Suport per nom. Better editing can eliminate the issues around WP:BLP.--User:Namiba 14:25, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Deletion I also have checked many of these articles, and so far, the majority fail verifiability on self-identification, resulting in such claims for people, including BLPs and BLP notables of non-BIA tribes, that are not supported by reliable, published sources and seem to, instead, be the implications of original research. The insinuation for the people categorized as self-identifying is that they are frauds. Wikipedia, which now plays a significant role in AI-generated searches, relies on its policies that require all material in its mainspace must be verifiable so as not to spread disinformation.Bcbc24 (talk) 17:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Wikipedia requires that the categorization of articles must be verifiable, "clear from verifiable information in the article" why it was placed in a particular category. If the article does not mention that an individual self-identifies, then it is OR to say they do and that they belong in a self-identifying category.Bcbc24 (talk) 04:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge (including subcategories) to regular descent categories, but purge obvious cases of fraud. The articles usually contain very little information about this topic, in most cases they just rely on the subject's own statement about their descent. But that applies to every other descent too. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:02, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The determining "obvious cases of fraud" is beyond Wikipedia's capacity and would constitute original research. Yuchitown (talk) 22:46, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It doesn't if reliable sources agree on it. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Those individuals are listed in the pretendian article. The U.S. press doesn’t cover the subject (so Wikipedia doesn’t either except in a few cases).
  
  Although a merge might be a good idea but merge the “descent” categories into the “self-identified descent” container categories since an individual stating they have Native American ancestry is extremely easy to verify with sources. Yuchitown (talk) 03:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  The articles in this category are evidence that it is not always that easy. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  I should follow up that there are countless articles, books, and even academic journals about Native identity, descendancy, genealogy, Indigenous identity fraud, tribal rolls, etc. and these are referenced in the many, many Wikipedia articles on these various subjects. What’s easy to verify with published, secondary sources is when an individual has publicly stated that they have Native American ancestry. The public statement is what’s easily verified. Yuchitown (talk) 10:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Agree with that, but my point is that a subject's own statement is sufficient for regular descent categories. There is no reason to add "self-identification" because that is what descent categories imply in the first place. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strongest Possible Support for Deletion Wikipedia has no standards for white people or Italian Americans to prove their race, ethnicity, heritage, or descent, beyond what RL states. It's discriminatory to insist on increased racial scrutiny for Native people. Further it's unreasonable (and invasive) to expect to see a Native subject's personal identification and demographic papers which could "prove" their identity online. Using those if they were available would be OR. The language of "self identify" when not supported by RL is additionally against BLP. Commenters should know the users originating this category are POV pushing across Wikipedia for Native racial purity standards that don't exist even among the most conservative Native people offline. They do not speak for even a vocal minority of Native people. This ideology is only prevalent on Wikipedia, on pages they have edited. See a previous convo here. See also the BLP Noticeboard. Check their history for many many more. Pingnova (talk) 05:45, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging previous participants in this subject: @CaroleHenson, @Morbidthoughts, @David Fuchs, @Only in death, @Alanscottwalker. Pingnova (talk) 01:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pingnova, being Native American or First Nations is not about race or ethnicity, and to frame it as such is simply wrong. Native American tribes are sovereign nations - it's about citizenship (political status; participating in cultural community). It's about who claims you (meaning which tribe claims someone as being a member of the tribe). It has nothing whatsoever to do with what a person claims about themselves. You have made a very strong statement by saying It's discriminatory to insist on increased racial scrutiny for Native people. No one is or was ever arguing for increased racial scrutiny, that's simply nonsense, and it is degrading towards your fellow editors. Please stop framing your arguments in terms like "discrimination" and making this into an argument about race and ethnicity when it is most certainly not. Netherzone (talk) 02:06, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I admit I'm not sure how to respond to a statement like "being Native American or First Nations is not about race or ethnicity," considering it very much is about race and ethnicity. The US Census is just one major institution that treats it as such, not even including the rest of scholarship. Wikipedia itself acknowledges Native people as a racial category. I find this a very disturbing response to my concern. Pingnova (talk) 02:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pingnova, sorry you find this disturbing but Indigeneity is not about race - it is about nation-hood and/or citizenship....it's about who claims the person (meaning tribe or nation), not who the person desires to be affiliated/identified with. There are Native Americans who are white, black, brown, red and yellow in their appearance or "presentation", however what distinguishes these individuals from those who are self-identifying is the fact that they are enrolled in a recognized tribe - they are citizens or members of their tribe or tribal nation (in other words, they are claimed by the tribe or nation) - they are part of those communities - and this fact must be backed up by verifiable, reliable sources (the tribes or Indigenous press, or other verifiable source knowledgeable on Indigeneity). Honestly, I don't understand why we are going over this again - there was a CfD re: this category in 2023, and an earlier one in 2019, both of which supported keeping the categories. Netherzone (talk) 00:45, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually its both, depending on who you are talking to and the context. And sometimes neither. Citizenship of a nation is generally a functional issue to do with where/how you live, your rights and benfits etc. Race & ethnicity less so except where by extension it affects the citizenship. Race & ethnicity is cultural heritage, which can be entirely divorced from citizenship. And certainly is in cases of forced dispossession. My comment on the BLP board (linked above) was in regards to an issue which people were overthinking in regards to wording in prose. The problem with categories is there is no nuance, you are either in the category or you are not. For someone who says "I have heritage X" - absent reliable sources it is a self identification. But there is no way in the current climate to indicate (in a category title, that lacks the prose available) that is distinctly different from people who are citizens of a tribe or who have recognised descent, without sourcing that verifies that. You cannot prove they are not without delving into original research. So insofar as this is a category, its named accurately enough for the large body of people who lack sourced proof they are of X tribe, or X heritage. Which, also like it or not, would rule out huge amounts of people who genuinely are of X tribe because reliable sources, as wikipedia defines them, do not support that stated fact. For a category to apply, it must be sourced reliably in the article. Doubly-so for a BLP. TheMainLogan has an illustrative example below of the issues, LDP has reliable sourcing that his father is part Cherokee, its not original research to say he is of Cherokee heritage in factual voice. It would be to say he is a citizen of the Cherokee nation, without reliable sourcing that indicated that. So any self-described category would clearly be inappropriate, but (and I havnt looked this far) if the category for cherokee is limited to cherokee citizens only, that would also be inappropriate. Which is why my general stance has always been "does this help a reader find the person's article? otherwise fuck da category police". Only in death does duty end (talk) 11:43, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, being Native American is a unique, political status (this was substantiated, 7 to 2, in the Haaland v. Brackeen case). The example previously given, the U.S. Census, uses the terms "American Indian" and "Alaska Native", and they do so because while some Alaska Natives, such as the Tlingit and Athabascans, are American Indians, many are not. Yupiit, Unangan, and Inupiat are *not* American Indian; however, they *are* Native Americans in the United States, as that article explains. Being of descent also has political ramifications; even members of unrecognized historical California tribes have CDIBs and can access Indian health services. These various terms mean specific things and even have Wikipedia articles. Within the umbrella term of Native American are hundreds of distinct ethnicities. Lou Diamond Phillips is a case that demonstrates the need for a vague, all-encompassing category. This phenomenon is so commonplace entire books are written on the subject and there's a Wikipedia article for Cherokee descent. Yuchitown (talk) 13:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is one thing to say some one has descended from the Cherokee or has Cherokee heritage. It is something else entirely to say they are Cherokee. As stated, Native American identity is not about who you claim to be but who claims you. There are perhaps millions who can say they have some Native American or Indigenous heritage. But to be Native American you must currently be a citizen of a recognized Native American sovereign nation. It may be different for other Indigenous Peoples around the world. The importance of that with regard to Native Americans can not be understated. People have taken advantage of Native American communities for a long time, robbing from them, recognition for themselves and personal gain. Wikipedia should not be about allowing that or even supporting that with our policies. We do not promote without verification. I personally do not care if someone says they have X heritage. I care that they say they are X which carries the weight of being entitled to certain benefits and recognitions. This is how it creeps into becoming the standard. First Wikipedia and then because Wikipedia supported and recognized, comes legitimacy elsewhere. I don't think we should be doing that. Wikipedia can not be the authority to confer legitimacy on this level or be the catalyst for that to occur. The way sovereign Native American nations are recognized is by other sovereign nations for which they have contact such as treaties and those sovereign Native American nations determine whom are their citizens no different that any other sovereign nation. --ARose Wolf 22:44, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion but support restructuring this BS. I think something should be done about the individual articles in this category and subcategories that outright say their subjects are of indigenous origin but users insist should use self-identification categories. For example, Lou Diamond Phillips' article outright says under "Early life" that his dad is part Cherokee, and "Personal life" notes that this was reported by Indian Country Today. Yet, despite the article pushing his Native roots, users insist on only using the self-identification category. It's contradictory nonsense. —theMainLogan (t•c) 14:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I strongly oppose deleting this category. We already decided thru consensus to keep this category just last year. [2]. I do not understand why some think that self-identifying as Native American is not a relevant category. Why would anyone think it is the same as saying someone is a Pretendian or some other offensive slur? It is not. It simply means the person has said themselves that they are NA or have ancestors who were NA, but if these claims are not confirmed by the tribes themselves, or by the Indigenous press, then it is simply a claim. Self-identification is not a judgement or a form of prejudice or a badge of shame. At all. As Yuchitown has pointed out, being Native is a political status - Native American and First Nations are sovereign nations. Indigeneity is not the same as race or ethnicity. If editors want to look deeper into the status of a person, here is a list of Indigenous newspapers and newsletter: List of Indigenous newspapers in North America where one can search for articles on Native identity, and for articles on many notable Native American and First Nations people. If confirmation of tribal citizenship is found, then self-identification is no longer relevant, because the person's status has been confirmed. We all know that anyone can say anything about themselves that they wish to proclaim, however that does not necessarily make it true. It's heresay. Honest or naive mistakes can be made by people, family stories exist about these things, as we have seen in recent news reports. The category itself is neutral, serves a useful encyclopedic purpose and I feel very strongly that it should not be deleted. Netherzone (talk) 23:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Pinging people who haven't edited this category and who didn't engage in the previous deletion discussion is WP:CANVASSING. Yuchitown (talk) 03:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge to descent, per the above. Unfortunately, whatever they think their doing, as seen in their arguments supporters want to use this for politics untethered to sources directly about the subject, or based on their own original research, practicing a kind of legalism-dispute against subjects. I came across this relatively new political effort on a long-standing article of an historical (long-dead) person where there is no support that that subject ever 'claimed'. What you have is independent RS (not self-anything) flat out ascribing that this was of their descent. So, in that sense, it is a lie that 'the subject claimed' or that they self-anythinged. We can't go back in history to bolster political claims of today, and we can't sue and bring to trial long dead subjects based on legalisms and original research (and we can't do it to BLPs), nor can we lie about them. Should it ever matter to the subject (DUE) that this controversy (ie., controverting prior independent RS) belongs anywhere near their article, new independent RS will have to write the person up specifically, not Wikipedians.-- Alanscottwalker (talk) 11:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You haven't edited this category or participated in the previous Cfd or 2019 failed merge proposal and did not stumble upon this discussion organically but are here due to WP:CANVASSING. Your previous statement is a diffuse attack against "they." I didn't participate in an editing discussion about a "long-standing article of an historical (long-dead) person" with you. Let's please stick to the subject and facts at hand. Yuchitown (talk) 20:16, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alanscottwalker, who is the "they" that you speak of? Netherzone (talk) 22:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
'They . . . supporters' should be clear. 'Singular they . . .subject' should be clear. It is the supporters who base the reason for this category to exist on politics and original research. Anyone can see that's not an attack, it is a critique of their basis argument. Nor is the critique diffuse, it is trenchant. Alanscottwalker (talk) 10:14, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's worse than I thought: I didn't realize that the criteria for being in the "actual Native American descent" category wasn't something like "independent reliable source" but rather "the tribe says so". Given that decisions on enrollment are political and not infrequently controversial/contested, it seems like a serious POV issue to rely on the tribal government as sole arbiter. Maybe we should rename this category"People of Native American descent" and make the other one, which apparently should be called "People descended from enrolled Native American tribal members", a subcategory. The distinction between ethnicity and political status is a red herring: we don't make the Austrian government the sole source for whether someone is allowed to call themselves of Austrian descent either, nor is the Israeli government allowed to decide who is Jewish. (This does not relate to the WP:DEFINING issue, which has never been satisfactorily answered). (t · c) buidhe 21:51, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Descent, by definition, is not the same as tribal enrollment. Seems like you should support this category, Category:American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent, since any notable American who has publicly stated that they are of Native American descent and that statement has been published in a reliable, source is in—viola!. It’s verifiable and factually correct (BTW in the US tribes determine tribal citizenship, in Canada the federal government determines who has status as a First Nations person or not). Yuchitown (talk) 22:13, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Political status is not the same as ethnicity, which is why recognizing a single political entity as sole arbiter of ethnicity (the people of native American descent subcategories) is a serious POV problem. Besides enrollment controversies, there are many people who have confirmed native American descent (not self identified) by genetics, genealogical research, or other means. (t · c) buidhe 14:23, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Breaking it down because there's obviously a lot of miscommunication:
I was saying that descent is not tribal enrollment. This is about a descent category, not a tribal enrollment category.

There is no single political entity as sole arbiter (this is not a category about status First Nations people in Canada).

Native American is not an ethnicity; Native Americans includes hundreds of different ethnicities.

Disenrollment would be another conversation (in fact, there's a Tribal disenrollment article). If someone was disenrolled, they would still be of descent.

Incidentally, User:Trystan added confirmation from a tribe. If people don't like that edit, have a conversation on the category talk page. It was just added; it can be removed. Yuchitown (talk) 22:56, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Buidhe, rarely does a BIA-tribe or non-BIA tribe publish through secondary RS that a person is or was an enrolled member. Even notable people I have met and know to be members of a BIA tribe would fail to get into a "People descended from enrolled Native American tribal members" because the "tribe says so" RS does not exist. Yet they are categorized as Native American in their Wikipedia articles even when verifiable RS does not support their enrollment status.

So descent categories might work if applied equally to all and no verifiable source disputes the descendancy because categorizing people as self-identifying is a problem. If the article supported by RS does not explicitly say the person self-identifies, it is WP:OR to categorize a person as self-identifying. And how about someone like Kali Reis, who is categorized in her article as self-identifying as Wampanoag, although she is a member of the Seaconke Wampanoag Tribe, a non-BIA tribe? Or Edwin Gourdin, who died in 1966. None of the verifiable RS on Gourdin's article or off says he self-identifies, yet within the last two years, his categories have moved him from being Native American and Seminole to self-identifying as Seminole descent. His article lead has also changed so that instead of Gourdin being "the first African-American and the first Native-American (Seminole) to be appointed a Superior Court judge in New England", he is now "the first African-American and the first self-identified Native American (Seminole descent) to be appointed a Superior Court judge in New England."Bcbc24 (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that's the exact NOR problem I identified. (t · c) buidhe 14:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And refusal to follow WP:INDEPENDENT sources. Indeed, Wikipedians are attempting to create something about a subject -- that the subject did something, or Wikipedians are, in effect, original-research-doxing the subject, to prove or disprove. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:54, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bcbc24, Tribes publish articles about their citizens constantly. List of Indigenous newspapers in North America provides examples for searching. However, as I pointed out in my above comment, the category was just edited; the edits can be undone with discussion on the category talk page. Yet they are categorized as Native American in their Wikipedia articles even when verifiable RS does not support their enrollment status. If you find something uncited, feel free to request citation or delete the information. If an article is miscategorized, remove the category. Yuchitown (talk) 23:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the Indigenous press and media outlets, there are Native American scholars whose well-researched academic papers and/or published books can be trusted as independent reliable sources. Netherzone (talk) 00:45, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is an intractable BLP problem with throwing everyone into a vaguely defined, broad category, and then stating in the category description "In some cases, published sources refute their statements of Native American heritage." That casts negative aspersions on everyone in the category. There isn't a clear articulation of what standard of verification is being applied to elevate subjects from this category to Category:American people of Native American descent, and I suspect any such differentiation would run afoul of WP:NOR, given that it seems to go far beyond WP:V. A category for individuals whose claims to Native American ancestry have been challenged or debunked in reliable sources may be warranted. But the majority of this category is just people who failed to meet whatever standard is being applied to Category:American people of Native American descent, and I don't see how that is defining.--Trystan (talk) 14:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you aren't angry that I reverted your text from the category. It seems since the idea of publishing sources connecting an individual to a tribe or tribal member to confirm descent is so repelling to Wikipedians, as seen the comments immediately above, the "Native American descent" categories should be merged into this larger category. If a person's biography in an entertainment magazine is deemed an acceptable RS, then they only thing can be factually taken from that is self-identification. Perhaps some of the commenters here who seldom or never contribute to or create Native American articles can share why they feel so particularly, strongly about eliminating this category. Yuchitown (talk) 16:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not angry at all; I understand the reversion given the above discussion. As for why I personally feel strongly about this category, it is for the BLP concerns I discuss above. Some have previously been addressed (we no longer categorize everyone in this category as being transracial and guilty of cultural appropriation), but others remain. I have particularly in mind those individuals in Category:American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent and its subcategories who are in fact of Native American descent, including those who have proof of that (it's just Wikipedia and published reliable sources that don't have that proof). Grouping those individuals in a category that says their claims are unsubstantiated and in many cases debunked seems inescapably pejorative to me. I don't object to Category:American people of Native American descent having a higher standard of verification than other descent categories, given that reliable sources well establish that an inordinately large number of individuals incorrectly claim Indigenous descent (whether through a good-faith mistake or deliberate fraud). But whatever that standard is, it should be clearly articulated. For individuals who don't meet that standard due to a lack of sufficient sourcing, my strong preference would be not to categorize them on this aspect at all, rather than to put them into a category framed in such a way that casts suspicion.--Trystan (talk) 17:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for responding. This category was definitely created as a compromise to accommodate Wikipedia's understandable needs for citation balanced with the need for factual accuracy. An attempt to address means of confirmation of descent was made at WP:NDN-ID; however, that appears to be too offensive to non-Native Wikipedians and those unfamiliar with Native issues to be adopted. Entertainment media, like People Magazine, are simply not going to be reliable sources for anyone's Indigenous ancestry. That's why I would be fine with just folding all the "descent" categories into the "self-identified descent" categories, if it's too offensive to request informed, authoritative sources (i.e. academic journals, tribal media, etc.).

On a complete flipside, it's standard for individuals to *not* be added to LGBTQ categories unless the person themself publicly identifies as such. So Wikipedia has made an accomodation to the real-world situation of a specific group that doesn't allow for *anything* published, such as in People Magazine, to define how someone is categorized. Yuchitown (talk) 21:09, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But there isn't an "American people who self-identify as LGBTQ people" category. That's the obvious analogy. Your argument actually suggests we should drop this category and only add people who self-ID as Native. Lewisguile (talk) 19:39, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep A person's public identification as Native American is defining and can be reliably sourced, particularly through tribes themselves and affiliated publications. The comparison of being Native American to be Jewish or some other ethnicity is fatuous; Native Americans are not members of a race or an ethnicity, but rather are citizens of sovereign nations. There is no insinuation that the people in these categories are not of Native American heritage. There are a number who were adopted and likely do have Native American ancestry, but because they are not citizens of a tribe, the source of their identity is through self-identification. "Self-identification" is not a pejorative term. I would like to reiterate that the clear majority of Native and Native allied editors who are involved with the Indigenous WikiProject and/or who regularly edit Native American-related articles favor the retention of these categories. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 13:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no insinuation that the people in these categories are not of Native American heritage. The category description says In some cases, published sources refute their statements of Native American heritage. Coupled with the statement that if the claim were substantiated, they would be in a different category, there is a clear casting of doubt onto the subjects in this category. Not to the extent that there formerly was when everyone here was categorized as transracial, but still problematic in my view.--Trystan (talk) 12:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete This category has been a lightning rod for POV pushing, with the label of "self-identifying" used to imply that certain people are not truly Native or are a "pretendian." Add into this the selective use of citations by supporters of this category to determine if a person is self-identifying, such as in the situation described by User:theMainLogan where an article in the very reliable publication Indian Country Today about the Native ancestry of Lou Diamond Phillips wasn't considered sufficient to avoid having him labeled self-identifying, and you have a category that raises serious BLP issues. If the consensus is to not delete this category, then at a minimum all reliable citations proving someone is Native should be accepted, not simply the current standard being used.--SouthernNights (talk) 15:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. As I've pointed out in a previous category discussion, this is a very awkward-sounding categories that thousands of readers and article subjects could find to be inaccurate, biased, or even offensive.

"American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent" is not wording that is typically used in academic literature.

Federal recognition is a controversial topic that should be discussed in the article text itself. It should not be forced into category names.

Category names should be based on serious non-biased anthropological and sociological research, and should not be based on decisions made by bureaucratic governments that may not always be fair.

I primarily focus on ethnic groups in the Middle East and Balkans, and categorizing thousands of individuals and entire clans as "self-identified" would be extremely offensive. For example, what if Serbia, Iran, or others do not officially recognize certain ethnic groups that Western anthropologists would certainly recognize as genuine ethnic or ethnoreligious groups? For example, if we were to label Yazidis or Alevis as self-identified minorities, that would be completely unencyclopedic, POV, and totally unsuitable for Wikipedia. Would we the generic Wikipedia reader out there be all right with "Self-identified Jewish people"? "Self-identified Hazaras"? "American people who self-identify as being of Jewish (or black, etc.) descent"? Most likely not!

There are also many unrecognized ethnic groups in China, since the Chinese (PRC) government officially recognizes only 56 ethnic groups. Should we also categorize every single individual from those unrecognized minorities as "self-identified minorities"? Certainly not, as that would be very awkward, controversial, and out of line with what Wikipedia categories should really be all about.

Another good reason to oppose this renaming is the WP:CONCISE guideline. We shouldn't make category names overly long and complicated.

As a result, the same should apply to Native Americans, First Nations, and other indigenous peoples in North America. Intra or intercommunity politics considered to be obscure, confusing issues by the general public should not be allowed to force its way into category names.

The subjects of various BLPs would also find this category, and related categories to be very offensive, and as a result this would violate Wikipedia's BLP policies.

I would also suggest taking a look at this book which discusses this issue in detail: Forgotten Tribes: Unrecognized Indians and the Federal Acknowledgment Process. Equiyamnaya (talk) 20:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've used that exact book as a citation many times in Wikipedia. I heartily recommend reading it. As demonstrated below, "self-identified" and "self-identification" are commonly used terms in literature about Native American identity. Ethnic groups, especially those on other continents, are not comparable to Native American identity, and "tribes have a unique political relationship with the U.S. federal government." [3] —Yuchitown (talk) 16:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment - It is truly shocking to me that so many of the "d*lete commenters are ignoring the thoughts, words and knowledge of our community members who are themselves Indigenous Americans, as well as the long-time members of Wikipedia Project Indigenous peoples of North America. Yet another erasure of Indigenous voices on WP. Netherzone (talk) 21:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Although some editors at the Wiki Project IPNA have self-identified as Indigenous Americans, we all can agree that Indigenous Americans are not a monolith. A very few do not represent the whole. So, it's problematic to suggest that editors arguing for deleting these self-identifying categories are examples of erasure of Indigenous voices. We all strive to follow the guiding rules of Wikipedia, presenting information that is supported in a neutral manner and by verifiable, independent RS and not OR. I am a Native American enrolled in a recognized tribe and am glad that Wikipedia provides the means by which I can engage in these civil discussions. Bcbc24 (talk) 18:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am going to tag the subcategories so they can be discussed here. This is also your general reminder to remain civil, please. If being respectful is not good enough a reason, closing discussions is much harder when there is a bunch of incivility.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:12, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- Being Native American isn't just about race, it's about having citizenship or descent from tribe, which are sovereign nations. Any arguments debating otherwise (such as comparing this category to categories about different ethnicities) should be ignored since they are ignoring tribal sovereignty making Native Americans more than just an ethnicity per WP:INDIGENOUS. See also this article How the Native American population in the US increased 87% says more about whiteness than about demographics to see this will be an ongoing issue. PS I'll not be responding to any replies due to a lack of time. oncamera _{(talk page)} 10:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete. The argument for a "self-identifying" category of Indian doesn't stand. It's vicious onto its own premise. It says that, while sovereignty implies a self-confered status and identity, only tribes that are recognized by the US Govt are true tribes. And folks who don't belong to the latter are self-dentify, not real Native Americans. I totally understand the concern about the Buffies of the world, but the conversation about this isn't improved by throwing in pejoratives like self-identify, which is what that nomenclature is. Then consider this angle: Buffy ain't self-idenitfy like members of North American tribes that aren't recognized by the US or, say, Mayan descendants. She doesn't have any tribe at all. She's European, not at all Native of the Americas. Maybe a different kind of self-identify? But by the proponents' arguments above, Buffy's gonna get the same status as full-blood tribal Mayans, Aymaras, and Huicholes living in Los Angeles. Then there are the Jenisaros (janissaries) of New Mexico and Texas. You see? There's not bottom. This discussion is far, far more complex than can be resolved with categories like self-identify. Tsideh (talk) 21:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The word you are looking might be Genízaros. Indigenous peoples of Mexico are categorized as such, like Category:People of Maya descent. Then, from the Andes, there's Category:American people of Quechua descent, etc.. Yuchitown (talk) 01:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Abenaki descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Acjachemen descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Anishinaabe descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Apache descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Blackfoot descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Cherokee descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Cheyenne descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Chickasaw descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Choctaw descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Chumash descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Comanche descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Comecrudo descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Cree descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Crow descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Iowa descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Iroquois descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Kiowa descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Lenape descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Lumbee descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Menominee descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Mi'kmaq descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Miwok descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Muscogee descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Navajo descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Nez Perce descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Nipmuc descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Ohlone descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Paiute descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Pequot descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Powhatan descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Pueblo descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Quinnipiac descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Seminole descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Shawnee descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Shoshone descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Siouan descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Tongva descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Tuscarora descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Ute descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Wampanoag descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Wyandot descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American people who self-identify as being of Yaqui descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have no opinion on the merits of this proposal; listing these out so people can see what is being discussed. Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:16, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Ethnicity ≠ citizenship, and tribe membership is closer to citizenship. Belonging to a tribe is associated with ethnicity but is not 1-1 and this issue is highly contested and complicated - removing this category would mean a massive, highly misleading oversimplification. The wording is awkward but the issue at hand is awkward. There’s not a perfect fit for everything. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:20, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:American people of Abenaki descent etc. Or in case a regular descent category does not exist yet, rename to it. As said earlier, there is no need to include self-identification in the category name, we do not do this in any other descent category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:41, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment "we do not do this in any other descent category" is really the core of it. If we did this to Native categories, we'd have to do it for every category, and it should be self evident that anyone in a particular racial or ethnic category also self identifies with their own heritage with only incidental exceptions. It is not only redundant wording, but because of the BLP issue that the phrase casts doubt on the individual, I have a hard time believing this would go over well in any other heritage category either. Pingnova (talk) 18:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are legal ramifications to the distinction between claiming descent from an Indian/Native American group and being recognized as such by an "Indian tribe" recognized by the Federal government or a state government (see Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990, for example). Family legend says that I have Cherokee ancestry (oh, wait, maybe it was Choctaw), but no government-recognized tribe will accept me as a member. - Donald Albury 14:30, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ancestry is not membership. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the key term User:Donald Albury used "family legend" — regarding his own family, so not an insult but just a common reality. A broad category encompassing a wide range of possibilities is needed. Wikipedia depends on verifiability, and actual descent from tribal citizen is seldom verified in secondary, published literature. What is commonplace are published statements by an individual. Yuchitown (talk) 17:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Actual descent is hardly ever verifiable and still we have thousands of descent categories. With few exceptions, sources take a subjects's own statement about descent for granted. After all, apgain with few exceptions, people don't have a reason to lie about descent. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Actual Native descent *can* be verifiable (mentioned below Henry Louis Gates Jr.'s work). And then people who's parents are citizens of different tribes than them (like Category:Kiowa people of Comanche descent and an example of a source explaining that Jesse Ed Davis is a Kiowa citizen and Comanche descendant; this can be corroborated by many, many other sources).
  
  Here's a secondary, published article about the 200 groups claiming to be Cherokee tribes. The number is past 400 now. I don't believe these groups are lying; they likely believe their descent with all their hearts, but their descent is unconfirmed. There's entire scholarly books published about these organizations, such as Circe Strum's Becoming Indian: The Struggle Over Cherokee Identity in the Twenty-first Century. More at Cherokee descent (not original research, everything over there is cited).
  
  I'm honestly not sure where you live. Are you unfamiliar with how contested Native ancestry claims are and how widespread the phenomenon of unconfirmed family stories such as User:Donald Albury discussed are in the United States? (Which, of course, doesn't not make him a bad person in the least or anyone his family liars.) Yuchitown (talk) 02:05, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  You mentioned sources about the topic of false claims about one's ancestry, but it is entirely unclear how that can be used to classify all individual biographies as true or false. And again, biographies shouldn't be in a descent category at all when sources generally agree on the falsehood of claims. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Except the statement is notable, is published, is easily verified, and countless Wikipedia editors find these statements significant enough to be actionable (i.e. repeatedly adding these articles to Native categories). This category is about the statement, not necessarily about the descent. Yuchitown (talk) 14:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  If the problem is what is the line between "Native American descent" categories and "self-identified Native American descent" categories, I would vote for collapsing the "descent" categories into the "self-identified descent" categories, due to the ease of verifying public statement of descent versus verifying actual descent by Wikipedia-acceptable published, secondary sources. Yuchitown (talk) 02:07, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  My family legend ties into this account, although the written version my grandmother had said Suki was Cherokee. I have a lot of distant cousins (whom I have never met) who have posted different versions of the story on the Internet. Normally, people don't identify with ethnicity of ancient ancestors (I have French Huguenot ancestors from the 17th century, but I don't self-identify as French), but there are a lot of people in the United States who do claim Native American ancestry no matter how diluted that ancestry has become. Some people self-identify as Native American on tenuous grounds in order to received benefits reserved for Native Americans, or to otherwise benefit financially or otherwise from the association. In my own family history, when my grandmother was a little girl (late 19th century), the whole Townsend clan picked up and moved from Kentucky to the Indian Territory to claim their "heritage" in land there, only to find out that Suki had not been registered with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (not surprising as she was born in the 18th century, had a white father, and apparently had been raised by her father's brother). I think it is important to maintain the distinction between people who are accepted as Native American by a government-recognized tribal entity, and those who self-identify as Native American, but have not been recognized as such by a government-recognized tribal entity. Donald Albury 13:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Thank you for sharing. Yes, the BIA is completely irrelevant in earlier centuries. Genealogy is the key in real life, and in some instances, like with Henry Louis Gates Jr., these primary sources get published and can be used on this platform. Yuchitown (talk) 14:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. No one proposing to delete or merge has provided a single published citation supporting the idea that "self-identification" is not a commonly used term when discussing Native American identity. Native Americans and scholars in Native American studies are familiar with the term since it is, in fact, ubiquitous in these discussions. Some examples:

"To be or not to be American: Statehood and Peoplehood in Native American Self-identification during the Self-determination era"
"American Indian casinos and the Rise of Self-Identification"
"An examination of self-identity, sense of connection, and membership of individuals with Native American ancestry"
"Self-Identification in Black, Red, Brown, and White: A Clarion Call to Address Medical Racism in Native American Communities"
"The expression 'self-identified Indian' is sometimes used to refer to anyone who does not satisfy the requirements specifically of legal definitions."[4]
"A Native American may not self-identify as American Indian if he/she is currently not in a position to contribute to the tribe."Native Americans & HIV
"Vizenor's, on the other hand, was published in 1988, in the midst of a Native American renewal that has seen a threefold increase in the number of self-identified Native Americans in recent decades." American Indian Persistence and Resurgence

These are examples I could quickly grab. This is the terminology used in relation to Native American identity. I would never dream of jumping into a conversation about Jewish-Arabic identity and start demanding changes based my personal feelings. Yuchitown (talk) 15:47, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think the category is useful. It isn't impugning the character of people to be included in the Cat. People in the US think they have Native ancestry for a number of reasons, family stories among them. So they might believe it's true in some cases. Others may have more nefarious and/or deliberate reasons to claim a Native "identity". Some are modern day carpetbaggers, looking for benefit by starting a casino. For some, it's to enhance their public image (e.g., Buffy Sainte-Marie.) Anyway, Yuchitown has made some good points. Cheers, Mark Ironie (talk) 23:14, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You've just characterized these categories as full of frauds, fakes, and people with unreliable family histories, and the category descriptions make a similar suggestion. But some of the people in these categories will genuinely have Indigenous ancestry, and have (non-published) proof of that. How is it not impugning their character for us to state that they "claim to have [tribe] ancestry but have no proof of this heritage" and lump them in with proven pretendians?--Trystan (talk) 13:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many people are members of tribes recognized by states but not the federal government. They do not belong in the same category as "Pretendians."--User:Namiba 20:19, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is one user's characterization. The category is necessarily broad due to the core tenant of Wikipedia being verifiability through secondary, published sources. These are all of the people who have made published statements of Native American descent (e.g. mentions in People magazine or TMZ), but reliable sources haven't substantiated the statements, for instance, scholarly sources that confirm their grandparent is a tribal citizen. Mainly it's celebrities who have stated they are of Native descent, and prior to these categories creation, their fans would repeatedly insert them into tribal categories. (The original nominator believes self-identified Native descent is not defining, but dozens/hundreds of Wikipedia editors apparently think otherwise.) Many might indeed have Native ancestry but be completely unconnected from the tribes they claim and sources haven't emerged to connect them (Henry Louis Gates Jr. has been great about publicly exploring people's genealogies and confirming or refuting Native ancestry). These are practical categories developed to follow Wikipedia's policies. If anyone wants to rephrase descriptions, the talk pages are a good place for discussion. Yuchitown (talk) 01:34, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's just simply not true. Look at Category:American people who self-identify as being of Abenaki descent. The majority of the articles are about scholars and/or writers of indigenous history and culture. Several of them are members of group of Abenaki recognized by Vermont but not yet but the United States. They are not "self-identified" nor are they merely mentions in celebrity media.--User:Namiba 18:15, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

True, people from entire Indigenous communities are pulled into or can be placed into Native American self-identifying categories if they achieve notability status because their community has been categorized as self-identifying as Native American. I previously gave the example of BLP Kali Reis, a member of the Seaconke Wampanoag Tribe, which is recognized by the Massachusetts Commission on Indian Affairs and, therefore a state-recognized tribe. However, this formal state recognition does not carry the force of law, so they have been placed on the List of organizations that self-identify as Native American tribes. Consequently, all their members are considered self-identifying, although no verifiable RS states it. For the Seaconke Wampanoag and their notable Reis, as with other articles in these NA self-identifying categories, categorizing them as NA-self-identifying fails verification. And Wikipedia requires WP:CATV, that "Categorization of articles must be verifiable." Bcbc24 (talk) 18:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whether an article should or shouldn't be included in a category is a discussion that should take place on that particular article's discussion page. There's some published material about the Seaconke Wampanoag Tribe, but there is a wealth of published sources discussing Vermont's four state-recognized tribes. Yuchitown (talk) 04:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I revised my comment to better show relevance to the discussion on this page.Bcbc24 (talk) 17:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bcbc24 The Seaconke Wampanoag are not state-recognized in any state. Massachusetts only has one state-recognized tribe, the Hassanamisco Nipmuc. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 23:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier in this discussion, User:Goldendragonfly77 outlines the real-time damage that the self-identification category misinformation is causing the hundreds of people in Herring Pond Wampanoag Tribe: (1) Erosion of Cultural Integrity, (2) Damage to Reputation, (3) Emotional and Psychological Impact, and (4) Barrier to Advocacy and Support. She notes the mental health impact of the misinformation: "The continuous attacks on our pages have caused emotional distress within our community."

Like the Seaconke Wampanoag, the Herring Pond Wampanoag Tribe has been not legally but still formally state-recognized by the Massachusetts Commission of Indian Affairs and is another example of a Native American WP:BLPGROUP that fails verification for NA self-identification. All members of the Herring Pond are automatically categorized as self-identifying in Category:American people who self-identify as being of Wampanoag descent with the description "This category page lists notable citizens of the United States who claim to have Wampanoag ancestry but who have no proof of this heritage. In some cases they make the claim despite having been proven to have no Wampanoag heritage at all." The Herring Pond and Seaconke are then subcategorized under Category:Wampanoag Heritage Groups, described as organizations interested in Wampanoag heritage that are not members of the three federally recognized Wampanoag tribes. This wording implies uncertainty about whether members of these two tribes are Wampanoag people, suggesting that only those belonging to federally recognized tribes are such.

The potential for misusing these NA-self-identifying categories and damaging the mental health and well-being of people is significant. For the majority of articles placed here, the RS saying that they self-identify does not exist. I am therefore modifying my vote from "Support deletion" to "Strong Delete." Bcbc24 (talk) 18:18, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bcbc24 Neither the Seaconke nor the Herring Pond Wampanoag nonprofits are state-recognized in Massachusetts. Only the Nipmuc have state-recognition in MA. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 15:47, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep all of these useful categories. Based on the excellent rationale and reliable sources presented by Yuchitown and by the points made by Bohemian Baltimore. My own rationale is found above in the first category discussion before this massive group deletion effort. Netherzone (talk) 19:57, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete, mainly per Pingnova. This category is WP:OR about living people and so I'm honestly astounded it exists. "We don't have a source" is not a source even for saying in Wikivoice that a claim has no source. This would be inexcusably sloppy for a category about rocks, much less people. Loki (talk) 01:04, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the core issue is the distinction between people who are citizens of recognized tribal organizations and those who claim descent without citizenship. Why don't we split them? For example, we would have Category:Citizens of the Passamaquoddy Tribe and an associated descent category while removing the "self-identify" claim which is obviously inviolation of WP:BLP?--User:Namiba 17:02, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:British Asian actors

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. The male & female sub-cats plainly should also have been nominated as part of, or promptly after, the 2023 nomination. – Fayenatic London 09:45, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose selective merging Category:British male actors of Asian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:British male actors
Propose selective merging Category:British actresses of Asian descent to Category:British actresses
Propose deleting Category:British Asian actors (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete. The practically same category was deleted un British actors of Asian descent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_April_20#Category:British_people_by_ethnicity_and_occupation Pinging @LaundryPizza03: from last discussion. Mason (talk) 14:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/delete, trivial intersection. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:11, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, either keep or rename to standardise the categories: I believed the previous merging was more to do with very specific categories. However, I don't get singling out this intersection given the existence of similar categories Category:American actors of Asian descent and Category:Canadian actors of Asian descent, unless you propose deleting/merging those as well. Asians make up the largest minority in the UK, I don't think it's trivial to dedicate categories to them as you would Category:Black British actors. – Starklinson 19:00, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This category was previously deleted. You need to address the concerns raised that led to the deletion. Mason (talk) 22:42, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Category:British male actors of Asian descent and Category:British actresses of Asian descent were not deleted, as far as I know, nor were Category:American actors of Asian descent and Category:Canadian actors of Asian descent among other broader categories. I was under the impression the rationale was more about specific national heritages being singled out (such as Category:British politicians of Turkish descent, for example). Starklinson (talk) 01:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The parent category was. "Category:British Asian actors " clearly is the same as Category:British actors of Asian descent. You need to address the concerns raised that led to the deletion. Saying that WP:other stuff exists is not a compelling argument under WP:EGRS. Mason (talk) 21:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:40, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Not sure it is necessary, but it's no less significant than Category:Black British actors, given there are actually far more Asian people in Britain than black people. So if this category goes then that one needs to as well. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/merge as nominated. There is no compelling evidence that this is a defining intersection under WP:EGRS (if anything, less common intersections are more defining) – no prejudice against other nominations. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 17:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Empires and kingdoms of foo

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 24#Empires and kingdoms of foo

Category:AAGPBL teams

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:54, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Springfield Sallies (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Rockford Peaches (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only two articles and one category in each. Already covered by other categories so no need to merge. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:17, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the subcategory suffices. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:20, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing my vote, the situation has meanwhile changed. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:22, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've added notable managers to each category.--User:Namiba 20:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Namiba, in that sense you can make one for every team, plus a category for managers, but I don't think that will be good for navigation at all since only one team - the Rockford Peaches - was around long enough to have at least five managers. As I noted, these are all well covered with other categories in Category:All-American Girls Professional Baseball League so why keep?

@Marcocapelle, what do you think? I know you changed your vote but still. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We should make one for every team. I'm personally trying to expand the categorization scheme for women's sports (see Category:Women's sports by populated place.)--User:Namiba 14:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:22, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Diseases and disorders

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 17:07, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Diseases and disorders to Category:Disease

Nominator's rationale: This was moved to the current name via a 2008 decision with very little discussion. However, the main article is disease, not diseases and disorders. This makes the category not match the article. I believe it should be moved back to the broader "Disease" to match the main article, which does not only include individual diseases but also the entire topic of disease. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. This category tree is suppose to include chronic disorders, not just diseases. Mason (talk) 14:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mason: The article disease states that a disorder is a form of disease. Disorder (medicine) is not an article. That means the current title is redundant. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. This rename makes it seem like you're removing disability and related concepts from the tree. Even if that isn't your intent, I see no advantage to this rename beyond brevity. I actipate numerous removals of people with disabilities from the child categories, as well as the removal of chronic disabilities. Moreover, I do not want to have to argue that Autism is a disease rather than a neurological difference. Mason (talk) 22:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brevity is established Wikipedia policy, see WP:CONCISE. On the other hand, having something not cause offense to people is not. In fact the opposite is true, see WP:NOTCENSORED. So if the argument is that classifying many things under a disease banner will cause offense, it isn't really a policy-based reason. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have missing my point. @Zxcvbnm I am trying to avoid have people misunderstand the category. "I actipate numerous removals of people with disabilities from the child categories, as well as the removal of chronic disabilities." This means that I expect many people to misunderstand that disease includes disorders. And I do not want to have to explain to people that over and over again that this definition is broad. WP:CONCISE says that the goal is to "balance brevity with sufficient information to identify the topic to a person familiar with the general subject area." What I am saying is that the new name does not provide sufficient information, and that for example, Autism is not some term people intuitive consider a disease. Mason (talk) 21:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like this is a thing that can be explained in the category's description. For example, "This category also contains things typically referred to as disorders in common parlance. Do not remove X and Y". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would not harm to keep the category name in plural, it is largely a set category. But I am ok either way. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:22, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; although some readers consider it technically redundant, it is appropriate for multiple reasons stated at Disease#Disorder. – Fayenatic London 11:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It's interesting to me that in Simple English Wikipedia, simple:Category:Diseases and disorders is a parent, and specific illnesses are within either "Diseases" or "Disorders". But perhaps Simple has a different protocol for categories, keeping things simple by following the words used. – Fayenatic London 11:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Events at Yankee Stadium

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 24#Category:Events at Yankee Stadium

October 14

Category:Lists of statutory instruments of the Welsh Assembly

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of statutory instruments of the Welsh Assembly to Category:Lists of Welsh statutory instruments – The name of the type of legislation is Welsh statutory instruments, all lists in the category have been renamed to use "Welsh statutory instruments". The National Assembly for Wales was renamed to the Senedd in 2020. Referring to the assembly in these titles is unnecessarily imprecise, when the actual name of the legislation is "Welsh statutory instruments" not "statutory instruments of the Assembly" or "statutory instruments of the Senedd". This is a different situation to List of acts of the National Assembly for Wales and acts of Senedd Cymru from 2020, where the actual name of the type of legislation referred to the Assembly/Senedd. DotCoder (talk) 17:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per actual article titles. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Two comments. First, noting for the record that OP was blocked in the interim (for non-sockpuppetry reasons). Second, the category was not tagged; I will do so now. If there are no further comments in a week, we should be all set for renaming.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:European theatre of World War II people

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

The result of the discussion was: no consensus. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:European theatre of World War II people to Category:People of World War II
Propose merging Category:Pacific theatre of World War II people to Category:People of World War II
Propose merging Category:Pacific theatre of World War II US people to Category:American people of World War II

Nominator's rationale: The vast majority of these categories are not defined by the European theater of ww2 or Pacific theater. These are primarily people who are European or Asian nationals, but not associated with the specific military campaign. If not merged, it should be purged of nationals. Mason (talk) 21:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So do you mean that it's acceptable to associate people with a war but not with a military campaign? The problem is the original categorization of World War II people was too confusing and full of redundancy. In my opinion, the 'theater' categorization is merely a categorization by region to clarify the category and make it show what are the most important and relevant under the subject. Aronlee90 (talk) 02:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They're not associated with a campaign. Jews of World War II‎ are not defined by the European military campaign. You're conflating region with military campaign. Not everyone in a region is associated with the war. If you wanted to break it down by region. What about Europeans who fought in the pacific? Would they go in both campaigns? This just doesn't seem helpful for navigation as it conflates several category trees.Mason (talk) 03:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What sort of redundancy? Marcocapelle (talk) 06:40, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can check Category:People of World War II by occupation, which was recently created by me. For other examples, "People of World War II by nationality‎" overlapped with many people in other subcategories, such as Category:Nazi propagandists and Category:People of Reichskommissariat Ostland. Aronlee90 (talk) 07:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It is still unclear to me what the problem is. Articles are usually in multiple categories, that is not a problem anyway. And this nomination does not have the effect that articles will be in more categories than before. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:37, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, reasons given above.--Aronlee90 (talk) 02:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No clear consensus to merge; discussion on that point as well as Mason's alternative suggestion to purge nationals would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:54, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:54, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Category:Washington Redskins currentteam parameter articles

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 21#Category:Category:Washington Redskins currentteam parameter articles

Category:Category:Washington Football Team currentteam parameter articles

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 21#Category:Category:Washington Football Team currentteam parameter articles

Category:Amirov brothers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 21#Category:Amirov brothers

Category:Joseon scholar-officials

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 21#Category:Joseon scholar-officials

Category:Pitcairn Islands people convicted of rape

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 21#Category:Pitcairn Islands people convicted of rape

October 13

Category:German abbesses

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:German abbesses to Category:German nuns

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comment~~ Oppose. I was indifferent. My inclination would be to upmerge Category:German Christian abbesses to Category:German abbesses , but I don't feel strongly about it. However, now that I've looked closer, I've realized that there were several other categories in here. I've reverted the changes where Marco placed Category:10th-century German abbesses, Category:11th-century German abbesses into German Christian abbesses. Mason (talk) 18:34, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That does not make sense. All German abbesses of these centuries were abbesses of Christian monasteries. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:47, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that you weren't transparent that you moved the categories deeper into the tree. You could have argued that the categories overlap, which is a reasonable argument. However that's not what you nominated here; you said that the category was a redundant. The category is called Category:11th-century German abbesses, not Category:11th-century German Christian abbesses. Mason (talk) 00:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:53, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep now that it has been correctly repopulated. See also Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_October_16#Early_abbots_by_century dealing with the same underlying issue ("they were all Christian"). Perhaps a better nomination would be to upmerge the by-century triple-intersection subcats e.g. Category:11th-century German abbesses to 11th-century abbesses, 11th-century German nuns, and German Roman Catholic abbesses where not already in a more specific subcat. Note that Template:Abbesses by nationality and century category header would then become obsolete. – Fayenatic London 11:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Free compilers and interpreters

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 21#Category:Free compilers and interpreters

Category:Bantu

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 21#Category:Bantu

Category:MP's for High Peak

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 rename. – Fayenatic London 12:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:MP's for High Peak to Category:Members of the Parliament of the United Kingdom for High Peak

Nominator's rationale: For consistency with similar categories such as Category:Members of the Parliament of the United Kingdom for Derby. Dave.Dunford (talk) 17:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom, this could have been listed at speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:31, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle: Thanks. Is it worth me withdrawing and renominating or shall I let it take its course? The guidelines for renaming a Wikipedia category (which I've not done before) are not clear. Dave.Dunford (talk) 09:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Better just let it takes its course now. Fortunately, discussions here at full CfD are closed much quicker now than in the past. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:02, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:List of gangs in Belgium

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Convert Category:List of gangs in Belgium to article List of gangs in Belgium

Nominator's rationale: Please advise if this is the wrong way to handle it when discovering a list article that was created in category space. DB1729^talk 17:30, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I think this is a perfectly reasonable, and creative use of CFD. Mason (talk) 00:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Milliegom I also think it should be converted yeah , thats completly true. 19:25 15/10/2024 CET — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milliegom (talk • contribs) 17:25, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without converting This is a poorly-sourced (cites to Wikipedia, really?) WP:NOTDIR-violating mess. We can save the trouble of sending it to a doomed AfD and delete it here and now. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:52, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with deletion. Earlier I had not checked the sourcing. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:50, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Milliegom The source you are talking about with being some wikipedia pages are for example MC's they are already on different wikipedia pages mentioned like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Gangs_in_Belgium so this is why I linked their pages to there. Also for the other not all of the groups have available sources but can be found in police documents and other things on the internet and local information wich can not be sourced. (NOTE : It has been sources/reffrenced since for some reason the linking wouldnt work) 17:02 18 October 2024 (CET) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milliegom (talk • contribs) 15:02, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Bohemian royal saints

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

The result of the discussion was: Already Deleted. (non-admin closure) Mason (talk) 00:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Bohemian royal saints (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Self-requested deletion of empty category Векочел (talk) 15:42, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:City of Albany, Western Australia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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) Mason (talk) 00:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:City of Albany, Western Australia to Category:City of Albany

Nominator's rationale: Bring in line with the parent article, City of Albany. Calistemon (talk) 15:15, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw, just noticed that this was rejected in March 2021 (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 February 11) after previously being proposed by me. Calistemon (talk) 15:19, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Nazi war crimes against children

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:34, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Nazi war crimes against children to Category:Nazi crimes against children

Nominator's rationale: I suggest removing "war" from the title. I recently wrote Nazi crimes against children and I did not notice the term war crime used often. Some items discussed in my article, like Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany. Now, we could argue that the current category is a subcat of the one I propose, but I am not sure if the sources really support existence of both, and if splitting Nazi war crimes against children from Nazi crimes against children makes much sense. To make things more confusing, category wise, Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany (article), a concept which predates WWII, is a child of the nominated category through the Children in the Holocaust intermedia category. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:59, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, not that I think a name change is necessary, but I'm fine with it if you want to match the article title to it. AHI-3000 (talk) 06:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Arrowverse character redirects

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:34, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Arrowverse character redirects to Category:Arrowverse character redirects to lists

Nominator's rationale: Covers the same scope, no need to have two cats. The "redirects to lists" cat is the primary one auto generated by redirect templates and is used more often. There was agreement that both are not needed in this discussion from three years ago, though no movement was made then. Trailblazer101 (talk) 03:56, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, seems trivial, all subcategories are already named "to lists". Marcocapelle (talk) 05:36, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Current justices of the Supreme Court of the United States

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Current justices of the Supreme Court of the United States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Categorizing "current" officials separately is not a useful thing to do, as explained in very extensive previous CfD discussions. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:25, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support delete per nom. Mason (talk) 21:08, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Wikipedia pages with colour accessibility problems

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

The result of the discussion was: reverse merge, renaming the old page over the new one. – Fayenatic London 10:51, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Wikipedia pages with colour accessibility problems to Category:Wikipedia articles with colour accessibility problems

Nominator's rationale: How is this page different from Category:Wikipedia articles with colour accessibility problems. The template might need to be fixed. {{cleanup colors}} Mason (talk) 01:59, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should merge it the other way instead, since all articles are pages and not all pages are articles. The pages category includes templates. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 02:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Either merge and create a separate templates category, or reverse merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:41, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My preference is to merge and create a templates category. @SomeoneDreaming created the new category "pages" without any discussion. (So even if the name stays, we should merge and then rename back to preserve the edit history). A separate templates category would be fine with me. Mason (talk) 21:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. I have no concern about which direction the merge happens, but "pages" is the appropriate final name as color issues can happen in articles, templates, categories, files, modules, and perhaps elsewhere. I don't see any advantages to splitting those into separate catagories. Thisisnotatest (talk) 21:37, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reverse merge per SomeoneDreaming – if the category is going to contain non-mainspace pages it should be use pages. I agree with Mason that we should keep the older category (Category:Wikipedia articles with colour accessibility problems with the newer name Category:Wikipedia pages with colour accessibility problems. I will tag Category:Wikipedia articles with colour accessibility problems. Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and tidy up page history. From 18 to 31 December 2009 there was Category:Articles overusing colours, which got deleted per WP:CSD#C1. I recreated the category on 22 March 2011, with the same name. Between 3 and 7 December 2013 the category was renamed (using the old copy-paste-delete method that is now obsolete) to Category:Wikipedia articles with colour accessibility problems, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 September 21#Category:Articles overusing colours. So for nearly eleven years there was one category, Category:Wikipedia articles with colour accessibility problems, and all pages bearing {{overcoloured}}/{{overcolored}} were in that category. Then on 27 September 2024 (just over three weeks ago), Thisisnotatest (talk · contribs) started Template talk:Overcoloured#Broaden scope of overcoloured maintenance category to include templates and files following on from which they created Category:Wikipedia pages with colour accessibility problems and amended the templates to pick one category or the other, according to namespace. All of this came during a stint of edits that Thisisnotatest was making, concerning colour accessibility. A number of discussions were started on various pages, some of which overlapped with one another, and it was hard to keep track of what was going on. One of these was Category talk:Wikipedia articles with colour accessibility problems#Replacing "articles" with "pages" and I still feel that way. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:36, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Slavery by war

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 20#Category:Slavery by war

Category:Pages with accessibility problems

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Pages with accessibility problems (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Redundant to Category:Accessibility issue tracking categories (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Accessibility_issue_tracking_categories) SomeoneDreaming (talk) 01:40, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. This should be merged to Category:Accessibility issue tracking categories, otherwise the child category will be isolated. Mason (talk) 01:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Mason. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge. It appears that deleting would do no harm, as the one subcategory Category:Wikipedia pages with colour accessibility problems appears on both Category:Pages with accessibility problems and Category:Accessibility issue tracking categories. If I am mistaken, then merging would definitely avoid harm. Thisisnotatest (talk) 21:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Thisisnotatest. Functionally equivalent to merge. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 07:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Noblewomen in the Holy Roman Empire

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Noblewomen from the Holy Roman Empire. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Noblewomen in the Holy Roman Empire to Category:Noblewomen of the Holy Roman Empire

Nominator's rationale: This was opposed at speedy. C2C: parent is Nobility of the Holy Roman Empire and the norm is of, instead of from. (I'm equally fine with Noblewomen from the Holy Roman Empire) Mason (talk) 01:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copy of speedy discussion

Category:Noblewomen in the Holy Roman Empire to Category:Noblewomen of the Holy Roman Empire – C2C: parent is Nobility of the Holy Roman Empire and the norm is of, instead of from. (I'm equally fine with Noblewomen from the Holy Roman Empire) Mason (talk) 20:28, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose several of its daughter categories use in. Such as Countesses in the Holy Roman Empire. The normal present is actually to use from. Of is normally used in actual titles, like Empress of the Holy Roman Empire. This may need more discussion but the general trend has been to use in when it is not clearly a title.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnpacklambert what general trend are you talking about? Also, I'm pretty sure that this counts as participating in a deletion discussion. Mason (talk) 01:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually for your sake it's better that you don't answer that. I'll take this to full, but regardless. Mason (talk) 01:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging contributor @Johnpacklambert:Mason (talk) 01:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prefer "from", that is the most often used. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to have it be 'from'. Mason (talk) 21:02, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

50 to 56 days old

October 12

Category:British music logos

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 20#Category:British music logos

Template:Yachtracing-stub

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

The result of the discussion was: upmerge Category:Yacht racing stubs; keep the template. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Template:Yachtracing-stub (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Merge into Template:Sailing-stub. Only 36 usages and the term sailing (also an Olympic sport) covers yacht racing, windsurfing, kitesurfing, model boat racing, dinghy racing etc.

I have also proposed renaming yacht racing stub templates to sailing stub templates, which I'm waiting for feedback. Pelmeen10 (talk) 16:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the category, don't delete the template. I guess this is what nom means, but if so the nomination is not phrased clearly enough. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Yacht racing stubs.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:06, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pelmeen10: Am I correct that you want to have {{Yachtracing-stub}} (the template) still exist but populate Category:Yacht racing stubs? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:08, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I want to populate Category:Sailing stubs. Sailing includes yacht racing. Sailing is the parent catory, "merge into" means deletion for the yacht racing (child) category. And next step would be to rename yacht racing bio stub categories to sailing bio stubs. Pelmeen10 (talk) 16:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 20#Category:Critics of veganism

Centuries in Landskrona‎

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

The result of the discussion was: manually merge older dates, prune C20 & 21. Many members are already in subcats of the target e.g. Category:Former buildings and structures in Landskrona. – Fayenatic London 21:13, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose manually merging Category:15th century in Landskrona to Category:History of Landskrona
Propose manually merging Category:16th century in Landskrona to Category:History of Landskrona
Propose manually merging Category:17th century in Landskrona to Category:History of Landskrona
Propose manually merging Category:18th century in Landskrona to Category:History of Landskrona
Propose manually merging Category:19th century in Landskrona to Category:History of Landskrona
Propose manually merging Category:20th century in Landskrona to Category:History of Landskrona
Propose manually merging Category:21st century in Landskrona to Category:History of Landskrona
Propose deleting Category:Centuries in Landskrona

Nominator's rationale: manually merge, most articles don't belong in a history category but rather in e.g. a buildings and structures category. The articles that do belong in a history category are so few that they can easily put together in a single category. For reference: only 5 of the biggest world cities have their own 15th century category next to Landskrona. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:21st century by city has a lot of city categories. Leaning Oppose. Gonnym (talk) 12:30, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It has a negligable amount of cities of around 30.000 inhabitants. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:26, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:59, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What if we purged the categories of things which obviously do not belong (such as buildings/structures) and then see what we are left with? At that point, we can have a more informed discussion about whether these are helpful for navigation. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should probably ping @Gonnym and Marcocapelle for their thoughts on the above. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That works for me. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:01, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you give an example of a page that does not belong? Looking at the first page from the first category, Saint John the Baptist's Church, Landskrona, it seems to fit the category. Gonnym (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It belongs in a buildings and structures category. In other cities we do not put buildings in history categories either. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 20#Women local politicans

Category:Israeli insurance brokers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Israeli insurance brokers to Category:Insurance brokers

Nominator's rationale: I think we should either generalize this category to not be specific to just brokers from Israel, or delete it because its unhelpful for navigation right now Mason (talk) 22:18, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just delete, the subject of the article was not notable because he was an insurance broker. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:03, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine with me Mason (talk) 21:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Graph algorithms to Category:Algorithms in graph theory

Nominator's rationale: Needs to be called either that or Category:Graph (discrete mathematics) algorithms, per graph (discrete mathematics) and WP:C2D. The latter seems more awkward, though. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 11:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting; see comment below.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copy of speedy discussion

Category:Algorithms in graph theory to Category:Graph algorithms WP:C2D. At the top of the category page: "The main section for this category is in the article List of algorithms, in the section titled Graph algorithms" [bold added]. Reverses recent bad C2D from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 4. Also per WP:COMMONNAME, Google Scholar has roughly 1k hits for "algorithms in graph theory" and roughly 6M for "graph algorithms", and there are multiple texts with "graph algorithms" in the title. The previous C2D rationale does not apply; we do not apply C2D to words picked out from title phrases, only to the whole phrase. The whole phrase here is "Graph algorithms". Its main topic is graph algorithm (redirect to same target as described in text above). The same bad reasoning from the previous C2D would then require disambuating "algorithms in graph theory" to "analysis of algorithms in graph theory", and then disambiguating "analysis", ad infinitum. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:26, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I fully symphatize with your reasoning, but I do not thing we can use CFDS to revert a recent CFD. Also pinging @HouseBlaster:, may be we can solve it in an easy way.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:43, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When I get back to my computer, I will revert the closure and relist the discussion. Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 17:35, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was objected to by means of filing a CFDS request to undo the move. Pinging @Ymblanter, David Eppstein, and 1234qwer1234qwer4: for their thoughts. Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts are adequately expressed in the hatted section above: "Graph algorithms" is by far the COMMONNAME, it is the title of the main article/section of this category (graph algorithm), it is not in need of disambiguation as a phrase, and we do not need to pick out and disambiguate individual words in phrases that are not ambiguous as a whole. Oppose rename. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per David Eppstein. "Graph algorithms" is a clear and unambiguous term, even if "graph" by itself isn't. — The Earwig (talk) 14:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:FL-Class cricket articles of Mid-importance

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 20#Category:FL-Class cricket articles of Mid-importance

Category:Cricket articles by review

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Cricket articles by review (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: There are no A-class articles within the project's scope; apart from that the project banner doesn't even has the A-class review parameters anymore. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 15:50, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also the following which are no longer used by the banner shell anymore as well.

Category:Reviewed B-Class cricket articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Category:Reviewed C-Class cricket articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 17:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per C4. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 07:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Medieval German LGBTQ people

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

The result of the discussion was: withdrawn. Thank you Bearcat for knowing what to do here. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 16:07, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose ??? Category:Medieval German LGBTQ people

Nominator's rationale: Moving this category out of the ordinal-century format broke its tranclusion of {{LGBTQ people by nationality and century category header}}. The code of the underlying template is quite complex and inflexible, and I doubt this error could be fixed without radical alterations. I don't believe it desirable to undertake that, especially when it is unclear to me how renaming the category actually addressed the original concern that this category is unhelpful for navigation. Pinging previous discussion's participants HouseBlaster, Bearcat, Marcocapelle, and Smasongarrison. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 14:32, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The transclusion problem was very easily solved by untranscluding the "broken" header template, and simply filing the category directly in appropriate parent categories instead of doing that via a transcluded header template. That's not a radical solution at all, as it's an entirely normal way of including categories in parent categories — we can use header templates instead of directly transcluded categories where they're useful and fit the circumstances, but there's no rule that we must always use header templates instead of directly transcluded categories, and no rule that a category is inherently invalid just because its parentage doesn't suit a header template. Note also the existence of siblings for Category:Medieval French LGBTQ people and Category:Medieval Italian LGBTQ people, and of a parent Category:Medieval LGBTQ people, all of which suggest that this is both an acceptable and expected category. Bearcat (talk) 14:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The whole point of the category header is that its only supposed to be used on a very specific kind of category. Thanks Bearcat for making the fix. Mason (talk) 15:02, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

(LGBT identity) fiction

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 the top three, keep the bottom 2. (non-admin closure) Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 19:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Fiction about asexuality (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Asexual fiction
Propose renaming Category:Aromanticism in fiction (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Aromantic fiction
Propose renaming Category:Bisexuality-related fiction (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Bisexual fiction
Propose renaming Category:Gay fiction (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Lesbian fiction (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Nominated for speedyrename by Fayenatic london, contested by me and agreed by Raladic, I'm opening CfD reccommended by Marcocapelle. I suggest these changes, I also nominated gay and lesbian categories in case this discussion decides something else in the other direction. Web-julio (talk) 12:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No objection from me. – Fayenatic London 12:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename as proposed. Raladic (talk) 14:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Web-julio: Do you have rename targets for Category:Gay fiction and Category:Lesbian fiction? You proposed a rename but did not specify a rename target :) House Blaster (talk • he/they) 06:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I should have replaced with "Propose keeping" in those two cases. See the last sentence I put in the nomination. Web-julio (talk) 17:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Anti-LGBTQ Pentecostal activists in the United States

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 19:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Anti-LGBTQ Pentecostal activists in the United States to Category:Anti-LGBTQ evangelical Christian activists in the United States and Category:Anti-LGBTQ Pentecostal activists

Nominator's rationale: Only two biographies. Upmerge to Category:Anti-LGBTQ evangelical Christian activists in the United States and Category:Anti-LGBTQ Pentecostal activists. Web-julio (talk) 11:18, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge for now, without objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:05, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Volleyball players from Izmir

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 keep. I will redirect Category:Volleyball players from Izmir to the diacritic version. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Volleyball players from Izmir to Category:Sportspeople from İzmir

Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:34, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:07, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw vote in light of recent developments, see below. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:06, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closure request and speedy deletion This category was actually misspelled. It should be İzmir not Izmir. Secondly, I found ~~four~~ twelve more volleyball players from İzmir. Lastly, I created a Category:Volleyball players from İzmir and populated it with those other articles I found. Thirteen I think is sufficient for a keep. So can someone please close this CFD, and delete the misspelled and now empty Category:Volleyball players from Izmir?Lost in Quebec (talk) 14:24, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:All Elite Wrestling personnel

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 19#Category:All Elite Wrestling personnel

Category:Upper class culture in Maryland

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:32, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Upper class culture in Maryland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Mostly consists of various localities and neighbourhoods. Not clear how that constitutes "upper class culture". AusLondonder (talk) 05:34, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 05:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the neigbourhoods articles should be purged anyway and not much is left beside that. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Delete per above. Any similar categories should probably be bundled with this. Sdkb ^talk 13:05, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This should have been nominated together with the category for working-class culture in Baltimore. The idea that because the nominator is ignorant of the concept of working-class culture or upper-class culture is a bizarre reason to delete the category. We identify something as working-class or upper-class through...reliable sources. The same thing we do with everything else. The argument for deletion boils down to "The concept is strange to me. I don't get it, so delete it". That's bogus. The argument that neighborhoods don't belong is not an argument for deletion, it's an argument for removing the neighborhoods. Although if reliable sources characterize a neighborhood as upper class, I see no reason not to include the neighborhood. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 12:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Armenian jurists. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:32, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:Armenian scholars of constitutional law to Category:Armenian legal scholars and Category:Scholars of constitutional law

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. only one page in this category which isn't helpful for navigation Mason (talk) 05:11, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, but to Category:Armenian jurists, there is no information in the article about an academic career, which I presume for modern people would be a requirement to be in a scholars category. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:10, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me Mason (talk) 01:33, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon X and Y

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Diamond and Pearl (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Pokémon species
Propose merging Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Gold and Silver (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Pokémon species
Propose merging Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Pokémon species
Propose merging Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Scarlet and Violet (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Pokémon species
Propose merging Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Sun and Moon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Pokémon species
Propose merging Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Sword and Shield (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Pokémon species

Nominator's rationale: For isonomy, I'm bringing these for discussion based in this one, feel free to merge the discussions.

Reasons: all of these only contain from two to four concrete articles plus a list, and some of them contain redirects. Web-julio (talk) 04:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This is a very bold move out of complete nowhere given that the vast bulk of these categories are perfectly valid navigational tools. The Sword and Shield category in particular contains five articles, while the bulk of the others contain around four or so articles, which are sizeable numbers when collected as a group. Merging all of these sub-categories back to the main category would clutter said category with twenty-three additional articles, and when the total Pokémon species category is covering nearly sixty articles, all of which have valid ways of better organizing them, a merge back would be detrimental for both navigational and practical purposes and be overall unwieldy for covering this subject effectively. I feel a merge would be unwise, and support keeping the bulk of these split.

As an aside, I did mean to discuss the Ruby and Sapphire and Sun and Moon categories when it wasn't midnight in my time zone, but given that this is being brought to the forefront now, I'll bring up my gripes: Both of these categories I feel definitely have room for expansion, but do not have enough articles to justify a split for the time being, in my mind. I wished to discuss this with other editors who I was aware had projects that would fall under these categories in order to resolve this matter further, but this discussion has thrown a wrench in that. Additinally, with Ruby and Sapphire in particular, I did also wish to discuss that I'm admittedly unsure if Regi (Pokémon) should be included within the category, and not just the redirects, given the overarching group was introduced in those games, which could potentially allow for a better justification of RS's sub-category. For the time being I am unable to discuss this as effectively with the categories being suddenly brought to deletion, but I would appreciate the nominator's insight on this, and my other points, as a whole, without a volley of deletion discussions being brought in as a retort. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:35, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, I was the one who created Ruby and Sapphire and Sun and Moon categories, so I admit that I thought these would be fine, but since you brought the other one for debate, maybe these would also be against policies or what CfD participants think of. So I'm open to comments. And they can be recreated, but where's the line and what would be the criteria for such inclusion/category creation next time?

Because, 5 isn't even a big number overall for general categories. And WP:SMALLCAT says [...] will never have more than a few members, [...], which is not the case, they will eventually be bigger. Web-julio (talk) 05:31, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - WP:SMALLCAT was deprecated in 2023. (Oinkers42) (talk) 11:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I'm quoting it, as the quantity isn't a factor anymore for deletion. Web-julio (talk) 17:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per above.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have always considered 4, occasionally 3, to be the minimum number of articles for a category to be useful. Many categories exist with four articles. These Pokémon categories are useful enough to stay, while the Gen 6 one is not because there are fewer articles. If more Gen 6 Pokémon get articles, we can bring it back. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. The game they were introduced in is not a defining trait, since they often appear in every subsequent game, even live in multiple regions. The above comments are largely votes with no basis in policy, besides the comment of Pokelego, which argues they are "valid navigational tools" (technically every category is, that doesn't mean it follows the guidelines). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zxcvbnm: I would argue that it is defining, because they don't all appear in every subsequent game, and reliable sources often sort them by generation, as does our list system. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:24, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But then they should be renamed to refer to their generation, not their game. Web-julio (talk) 16:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The generations are divided by when a new game releases (Red and Blue were Gen 1, Gold and Silver were Gen 2, X and Y were Gen 6, etc.) and I think this name is more self-explanatory for readers who do not have much prior knowledge of the Pokémon series, while also allowing it to be categorized under Video game characters by game. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not essentially. Examples: Kleavor and Meltan, as well as Hisuian Zoroark and Hisuian Voltorb, were all introduced in Pokémon Legends: Arceus but in different generations. If we followed what you said, they would be on Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Sun and Moon or Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Sword and Shield, but they aren't. Web-julio (talk) 17:33, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quicole is kind of generalizing but a game of introduction is separate from a generation. A generation often starts with a specific pair of games, and multiple games can fall into a generation. I can find some sourcing more specifically backing this up later but they are inherently two separate albeit equally relevant things. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 12:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely concur with Quicole's argument. Species are frequently discussed in the subject of games of origin and are frequently defined by them even in other articles. It's consistent with multiple other things done already, so it's a category that is rather defining and is something that won't be obscurely specific to readers. It's something that can actually be argued as a valid trait of the species, unlike other specific subcats where game of origin oftentimes isn't as necessary or broadly defining. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:34, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon X and Y

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon X and Y (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category only contains one item that has an article. The main Pokémon species category is not overly cluttered, and thus this sub-category is not necessary and better off deleted for the time being. Should more X and Y Pokémon get articles, I am unopposed to future recreation, but for the time being it is not necessary and has no immediate use in the near future. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment at the time of nomination, this only contained Klefki. It now contains the generation VI list, Klefki, and a large number of redirects. My same argument still applies here; two subjects are not enough for a subcategory when the main category is not suffering from clutter as-is, and is overall unnecessary. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:55, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You nominated it while I was populating. Anyways, you created Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Gold and Silver, which only contains three articles and the list. The same happens with Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Scarlet and Violet by QuicoleJR and Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Sword and Shield by Cukie Gherkin (recently, redirects were put in this one). Based on these, I also created Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire and Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Sun and Moon, in which each one contains only two articles plus list and three/two redirects. So, all of these are debatable, and I'm sure many people here on CfD would vote them all of these for upmerge. Web-julio (talk) 04:10, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument against this category being deleted is that other categories should also be deleted? That's a fairly bizarre argument. In any case, the other categories, while fringe, do provide some navigational utility given four articles would be better off sub-categorized compared to two. Including all of those groups of four and above in the main category would be unwieldy; they're better off organized for the sake of cleanliness and readability. Two articles is nowhere near enough to provide potential category organization issues, and the plethora of redirects are not proper articles, especially when many of them are redirecting to topics often discussed only in brief in the parent article.

While the RS and SM categories may be iffy in a similar vein, this discussion is pertaining strictly to the XY category, and per Wikipedia:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, this is not a point we need to worry about for this discussion. I'm admittedly still considering the former two and wish to discuss them further outside of the scope of a CfD as well. For now though, I feel as though this sub-cat still isn't serving a valid navigational or practical benefit, and would likely need at least a few more fully fledged articles before a sub-cat like this would be beneficial for navigational or practical purposes. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:24, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: WP:OTHERCATSEXIST says: an appeal to "Other similar category schemes don't – and shouldn't – exist" may be an appropriate argument for arguing for deletion of a category.. Web-julio (talk) 05:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And you missed the point in commenting about other categories, because I didn't mention Red and Blue, for example, I indeed assessed the current state of the others, which is precarious as well. Web-julio (talk) 05:41, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, didn't know there was a separate exception for categories. Then ignore my OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, as it's not relevant to this discussion.

In any case, I didn't bring up Red and Blue either, and I wasn't arguing anything related to it, so I'm a bit confused about how this relates to my prior arguments. I argued that the current sub-categories were fine for categorical purposes, and that the XY one specifically was not, and you saying "I disagree" doesn't really answer my arguments at all, unless I'm wildly misinterpreting what you're saying here. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 16:24, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - Regardless of any other categories that may exist, 2 articles is still too few for a useful category in my eyes. Let us leave any other potential categories to a different discussion (like the one currently above, for instance). (Oinkers42) (talk) 11:34, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now. X and Y have a rather limited pool and even among people working on these articles it feels like there's very unlikely to be any articles spun out unlike the other games. While I understand the need to subcategorize, even projects like WP:SE don't have a subcategory for every Final Fantasy title, as some of them just don't have enough content (case in point, the Final Fantasy V category was only remade her very recently, after the list was recreated). No prejudice if this situation changes at a later time.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:01, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Only two articles. I also object to calling all of the Mega Evolutions Gen 6 Pokémon, since they are just temporary transformations, and we wouldn't consider G-Max Pokémon to be a separate species. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:22, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, I suppose the delete votes should be read as a partial merge, i.e. by moving the two articles directly under Category:Pokémon species. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I'm arguing for at least, and I believe the others are as well. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:46, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Overly small and unnecessary as a category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:32, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:SpaceX astronauts to Category:SpaceX-flown astronauts or something similar, per discussion on the Category talk:SpaceX astronauts.

Nominator's rationale: Prior to September 2024, all astronauts listed in Category:SpaceX astronauts had simply flown on a SpaceX capsule launched on a SpaceX Falcon 9 launch vehicle. Now, with the completion of the recent private spaceflight mission Polaris Dawn, two SpaceX employees—Sarah Gillis and Anna Menon—have been astronauts (while employed by SpaceX) on this recent commercial spaceflight. It would be confusing to categorize the two of them as merely the sense of astronauts who have flown on SpaceX equipment, as they are also SpaceX employees, and are categorized in Category:SpaceX employee astronauts. (more emplyees are planned to fly on future spaceflights). N2e (talk) 17:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - the current tree Astronauts by space program > SpaceX astronauts > SpaceX employee astronauts makes sense. If anything, Category:SpaceX employee astronauts (2) is unnecessary since 1) it is simply an overlap of Category:SpaceX people (21) & Category:SpaceX astronauts (38), and 2) is not (yet) needed for diffusing either of its parents, but that can be overlooked if it grows quickly enough. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 14:58, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More participation needed to form consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:24, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and merge its subcategory into Category:SpaceX people. "SpaceX" is not a space program, it's a company. And as the nom said, they are not technically "SpaceX astronauts". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to tag Category:SpaceX employee astronauts. Thoughts on zxcvbnm's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:37, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 to delete Category:Women Metropolitan Police officers. Rename Category:Women Merseyside Police officers to Category:Merseyside Police officers (and add non-women to the category). Merge the rest as nominated. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:45, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:British patrolwomen to Category:British women police officers
Propose merging Category:Women West Yorkshire Police officers to Category:West Yorkshire Police officers and Category:British women police officers
Propose merging Category:Women Metropolitan Police officers to Category:British women police officers and Category:Metropolitan Police officers
Propose merging Category:Women Merseyside Police officers to Category:People from Merseyside and Category:British women police officers

Nominator's rationale: Duel upmerge these intersections doesn't meet the criteria for defining under WP:EGRS. One note: For Women Merseyside Police officers Either dual upmerge under egrs or broaden to Merseyside Police officers. Mason (talk) 23:27, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Category:Women Metropolitan Police officers, which is clearly valuable as a large and notable category. Given the history of women in policing (and in the Met in particular), this is a notable intersection. Merge the rest, but only merge Category:Women Merseyside Police officers to Category:British women police officers. Note these are non-diffusing categories, so female officers should also be in the parent category for their force anyway. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:12, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Necrothesp's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 15:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would need to know more about how the intersection between Women Police officers and the met is defining. Just because they're both important on their own doesn't mean that the intersection is. What does @Necrothesp think about repurpsong Category:Women Merseyside Police officers to Merseyside Police officers? Mason (talk) 21:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Mason's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Necrothesp: Thoughts on the above? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. There are probably enough of them. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Tourist attractions in Salem

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Tourist attractions in Salem district and turn the category into a dab. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 14:36, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Tourist attractions in Salem (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: IS empty. The one entry was not relevant, so was deleted Isoceles-sai (talk) 08:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category has been emptied. You know, Isoceles-sai, you can tag empty categories CSD C1 and that won't entail a week-long (or longer) discussion. There is really no point of having a discussion about an empty category. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Category is added in multiple articles which is relevant to the category. So no need to delete the category. MVDR Enthusiast (talk) 14:50, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP. Looks like the Category was under construction. Sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isoceles-sai (talk • contribs) 16:26, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Tourist attractions in Salem, Tamil Nadu, aligning with parent and sibling categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: There is already a category of Category:Tourist attractions in Salem district and most of the entries added to the new category are a copy paste from the old category. Most of it is located in Salem district rather than the town/city itself and has been deleted. Weak keep as there are still a few entries relevant to it and I have added it as a subcategory to the original category. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 06:26, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, then it should be merged to Category:Tourist attractions in Salem district rather than renamed. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:07, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - If kept, it should be moved over to Category:Tourist attractions in Salem, Tamil Nadu to both align with its parent and sibling categories, and to avoid confusion for other Salems, such as Salem, Massachusetts. (Oinkers42) (talk) 18:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:23, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:10, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Tourist attractions in Salem district. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Tourist attractions in Salem district. Servarayan Hills does not appear to belong in this more specific category, and that leaves two members making this category unhelpful for navigation. If kept – for which I do not advocate – rename to Category:Tourist attractions in Salem, Tamil Nadu. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:36, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Purge the mountains then merge and disambiguate between Salem district, Salem County, New Jersey, Salem, Massachusetts, Salem, Oregon and Salem, Virginia. – Fayenatic London 08:15, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with FL on the need for a {{category disambiguation}}. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 15:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:11th-century Somali people

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

The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Ethnic Somali people and Category:10th-century African people / Category:11th-century African people (as applicable). House Blaster (talk • he/they) 15:06, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:11th-century Somali people to Category:11th-century Somalian people
Propose renaming Category:10th-century Somali people to Category:10th-century Somalian people

Nominator's rationale: Opposed for speedy.C2C: parent is Somalian people by century, but @Marcocapelle: makes good points that "Category:Ethnic Somali people and the country Somalia did not exist yet in the 11th and 12th century. " Mason (talk) 23:16, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit problematic because there is also Category:Ethnic Somali people and the country Somalia did not exist yet in the 11th and 12th century. On top of that it is unclear whether Somalian would include or exclude current Somaliland. So I think it is better to re-parent these categories, move them from the Somalian to the Ethnic Somali tree. Also rename the 13th to 19th century categories to "Somali". For example in the 13th century category there is someone in the Maldives who was probably an ethnic Somali. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:48, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that they should either be renamed per above or merged to Category:Ethnic Somali people and 10th-century African people/11th-century African people. Mason (talk) 22:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle: thoughts on the above? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We surely can merge these two categories because of their small size (but that isn't going to be a solution for later centuries). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Members of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 17#Category:Members of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre

Category:Solent_University (and sub-categories)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:47, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose amending Category:Solent_University to Category:Southampton_Solent_University
Propose amending Category:People_associated_with_Solent_University to Category:People_associated_with_Southampton_Solent_University
Propose amending Category:Academics_of_Solent_University to Category:Academics_of_Southampton_Solent_University
Propose amending Category:Alumni_of_Solent_University to Category:Alumni_of_Southampton_Solent_University

Nominator's rationale: The university has changed its name and the alumni category link on the wikipedia page has been incorrectly updated, so is currently going to a blank category page Mystery Cat (talk) 15:07, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean a Blank Category page? Mason (talk) 21:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. I mean a category page which hasn't been created yet - they changed the name in the link without checking if that category existed. It's 'see also' at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southampton_Solent_University#Notable_alumni Mystery Cat (talk) 09:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alt Rename without the underscores, which I think was the intent. I don't see a formal RM but the rename is confirmed here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: None of these were tagged; I will do so now. I will note that on Wikipedia, Example page and Example_page are equivalent (just like Example page and example page are equivalent).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:59, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose based on WP:COMMONNAME. The official name might have changed but it's far more commonly referred to still as just Solent University - even their own website repeatedly refers to themselves as just "Solent" or "Solent University" without the "Southampton". Waggers TALK 10:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename as long as the article is at Southampton Solent University the categories should be too. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:NCT Wish albums

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:NCT Wish albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Two redirects which are articles already in Category:NCT Wish songs. Information provided in the song articles do not further elaborate on the single albums to justify both albums and songs categories. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 03:55, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait some discussion needs to happen elsewhere as to whether the two articles should be reclassified as "single albums" rather than just "single" - I believe for consistency sake they should probably be migrated to the “single album” format which would be valid for this category.

Either way, the artist has an EP being released in about 5 hours that will inevitably have an article created in the extremely near future (within hours) that will belong in this category which could change the direction of this deletion discussion before the nomination can run its course. No point in going through a week worth of deletion discussion if by the end of it the nomination rationale that all the votes are based upon will no longer be valid. RachelTensions (talk) 04:10, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Steady (NCT Wish EP) has now been created and added to the category. There are now multiple articles using this category. RachelTensions (talk) 08:06, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional support, as long as there aren't articles the category can be deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:44, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle There are now articles. RachelTensions (talk) 16:05, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:52, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Category:NCT Wish EPs is now created and I moved the Steady (EP) there. Should this cat be deleted even though there's now a subcat? 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 05:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Two redirects and a subcategory as of relisting. Is this enough to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:17, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. – Fayenatic London 10:40, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Riize (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only album articles which are already sufficiently categorized in an albums subcategory for the group. This is an unnecessary eponymous parent per WP:OCEPON. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 03:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: as per WP:CATMAIN. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 04:27, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this is an obvious case of WP:OCEPON. Artists only have an eponymous category if there are some articles about them personally, which is not often the case. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:35, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updated vote rationale see below. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:CATMAIN RachelTensions (talk) 04:39, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CATMAIN does not provide any rationale for keeping eponymous categories but simply provides instructions on how to categorize articles within an eponymous category should one exist. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 05:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:44, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This category has been expanded, with several new articles and subcategories added since this nomination was opened. May warrant re-evaluation. RachelTensions (talk) 15:03, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The new subcat are just image files, which would already be placed in individual articles, and the group would be more defining to SM Rookies than the other way around. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There have been 4 subcats added to the root category: Category:Riize songs, Category:Riize EPs, Category:Riize album covers, and Category:Riize audio samples. RachelTensions (talk) 05:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another article was just created & added. RachelTensions (talk) 06:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the albums and songs categories already link to each other (as usual), SM Rookies does not belong in this category, that leaves only one spin-off article next to the eponymous article and they already refer to each other directly. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:17, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So would all the subcats just have no parent cat? RachelTensions (talk) 06:29, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Correct, all information about this topic is interlinked anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 October 4#Category:Riize.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:19, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I neglected to ping people. Relisting this time with a ping.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars, Marcocapelle, Omnis Scientia, and Windborne Rider: thoughts on whether the category has been sufficiently populated? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still lean delete per @Marcocapelle's reasoning above. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:34, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to support keeping this category. {{Riize}} should be removed from this category per Wikipedia:Categorization § Template categorization (which says templates should only be in subcategories of Category:Wikipedia templates), but otherwise this looks like a well-populated category: Four subcategoties, two articles, and a file for good measure. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:45, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed, thanks. RachelTensions (talk) 01:49, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HouseBlaster: I am willing to concede to keeping this one. I don't think the categorization here of image and audio files, subcategorized or not, justify an eponymous category since they are contained with the articles within the category. However, the addition of an article on a tour by the group adds a bit more substance (albeit minimally) to allow for the category's existence. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:48, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 20#Category:Lostwave

October 11

Category:Israel Prize in social sciences recipients who were economists

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Israel Prize in social sciences recipients who were economists to Category:Israel Prize in social sciences recipients
Propose merging Category:Israel Prize in social sciences recipients who were historians to Category:Israel Prize in social sciences recipients

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection User:Namiba 17:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:25, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:33, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Raymond3023 (talk) 14:55, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge One of the few defining awards but we should stick to the offical categories they were awarded in. (I checked and all the biographies are already in Category:Israeli economists or Category:Israeli historians, so no dual merge is needed.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 19:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Ships build by George Brown and Company

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Ships build by George Brown and Company to Category:Ships built by George Brown and Company

Nominator's rationale: typo in title Davidships (talk) 13:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy rename WP:C2A / C2C. – Fayenatic London 13:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Apartheid States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is an odd category that does not meet WP:SUBJECTIVECAT, and depending on which subjectivity is used will likely also fail WP:NARROWCAT. There are currently five entries (Bantustan, Confederate States of America, Rhodesia, Union of South Africa, and South West Africa), and it is unclear what the inclusion criteria for that diverse mix of articles is meant to be. All entries have issues. The Union of South Africa is where apartheid developed, but only towards the end, and most of apartheid history took place after the establishment of a Republic. South West Africa did have an apartheid system throughout its history, but it was not a state. Those are the key polities covered in the Apartheid article. The concept of Bantustans was a product of apartheid, but it sounds very odd for the bantustans to be described as "Apartheid states". I could see an academic paper creating a meaning for the label that would work, but that is far too specific for a category. Rhodesia and the Confederate States of America had severe racial discrimination, but not apartheid systems. I don't see how the category could be defined in a way that would add value to a reading of the Apartheid article. CMD (talk) 10:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:42, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:27, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The creating editor's subjective definition of "Apartheid" is (at best) questionable. As is their apparent classification of all forms of segregation or discrimination as equivalent to (or examples of) "Apartheid". In most cases such classifications being applied without any explanation or apparent consideration of WP:CATV... Guliolopez (talk) 19:23, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Honour. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Honor to Category:Honour

Nominator's rationale: To match main article Honour. Opposed last month at CFDS. AusLondonder (talk) 09:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mild oppose, as the contents include many articles and sub-cats with the spelling "honor", many of which are US-centric and therefore would never be renamed to match. – Fayenatic London 14:56, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't make sense as to why the main category should not match the main article. That's standard practice. AusLondonder (talk) 05:33, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename with redirect per nom. I don't follow Fayenatic london's argument here. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Working-class culture in Baltimore

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Working-class culture in Baltimore (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category is mostly populated with neighborhoods. It's not clear exactly what makes a piece of culture "working-class" and how we draw the line, and it's not the normal way we organize categories. Sdkb ^talk 04:27, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I recently saw Category:Upper class culture in Maryland which again mostly consists of neighbourhoods and wasn't sure it was appropriate. AusLondonder (talk) 09:29, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, after purging the neighborhoods not much useful is left. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:31, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The claim that neighborhoods don't belong in the category is not an argument for deleting the category. It's an argument for not including the neighborhoods. And I would argue that neighborhoods do belong if reliable sources characterize them that way. The idea that we can't refer to anything as "working-class" is absurd. We can do exactly that by using reliable sources that discuss the working class nature of an event, cultural practice, organization, etc. Simply because the idea of "working-class culture" is unknown to the nominator is not at all a justification for deletion. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 12:37, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Singaporean case law by topic

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Singaporean case law by topic to Category:Singaporean case law

Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer Mason (talk) 03:36, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:31, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Shooting coaches by nationality

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

The result of the discussion was: merge. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Shooting coaches by nationality to Category:Shooting coaches
Propose merging Category:French shooting coaches to Category:Shooting coaches and Category:French sports coaches (added 11 Oct at 16:13)

Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer with only one nationality in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 01:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, also Category:French shooting coaches to Category:Shooting coaches as it only contains 1 article. I was going to nominate Category:Shooting coaches itself for upmerging to Sports coaches, but I found a US college subcat and other articles to go in it via links from German Wikipedia. – Fayenatic London 15:12, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge both per above. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:33, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Comedy directors

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 19#Comedy directors

Summer camps in fiction

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 19#Summer camps in fiction

Category:Over the Hedge video games

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 19#Category:Over the Hedge video games

October 10

Category:Malagasy masculine given names

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Malagasy names. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:26, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Malagasy masculine given names (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only one. Can EASILY be combined into main cat. Roasted (talk) 23:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Malagasy names, is probably what nom means too. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:37, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Straggler LGBT categories

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 18:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:LGBT history in Virginia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:LGBTQ history in Virginia
Propose renaming Category:LGBT history in Wisconsin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:LGBTQ history in Wisconsin
Propose renaming Category:LGBT people from Manchester (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:LGBTQ people from Manchester
Propose renaming Category:LGBT rights activists from Illinois (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:LGBTQ rights activists from Illinois

Nominator's rationale: Categories which lack the Q; rename per Talk:LGBTQ#Requested move 14 August 2024, WP:CONSUB, WP:C2C, and WP:C2D. Similar renames have been opposed at CFDS, so I am starting a full discussion. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 18:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename, consistent with all previous article and category renames. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename as nominated. Raladic (talk) 14:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

LGBT articles by importance

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. I forgot about WP:C4. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 18:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:LGBT articles by importance (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:High-importance LGBT articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Low-importance LGBT articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Mid-importance LGBT articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:NA-importance LGBT articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Top-importance LGBT articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Unknown-importance LGBT articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: {{WikiProject LGBTQ studies}} does not actually take an |importance= parameter. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 18:47, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Shopping centres in Stirling (council area)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:10, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Shopping centres in Stirling (council area) to Category:Shopping centres in Scotland

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single category, unhelpful for navigation. Also merge to Category:Buildings and structures in Stirling (council area) AusLondonder (talk) 12:29, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge, category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 after thorough discussion; unlikely a WP:RELIST will help. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:11, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:African aviators (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: There are no other aviators by continent categories (unless you want to count Category:Australian aviators). The other option is to create them and diffuse Category:Aviators by nationality. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retain: What is done for one continent does not have to be done identically for all other continents, no such requirement. Very few aviators from Africa are the subjects of an article. This makes this category more notable. Pete unseth (talk) 12:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. If kept then I suggest create a Category:Aviators by continent and make for other continents as well. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Category:Aviators by nationality suffices. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and create other continental categories. Given the relatively small number of articles, it makes more sense to have a continental category than many small national categories.--User:Namiba 17:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Continental categories might make sense if and only if a significant number of nationality categories would be merged to them. I would only discuss that in conjunction. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:40, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Shopping malls in Sharjah

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. Categorization of Al Shaab Village can be discussed at Talk:Al Shaab Village. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:31, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Shopping malls in Sharjah to Category:Shopping malls in the United Arab Emirates

Nominator's rationale: Contains a single article and is unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 11:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge, also to Category:Sharjah (city). Marcocapelle (talk) 19:59, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Shopping malls in Ankara

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:26, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Shopping malls in Ankara to Category:Shopping malls in Turkey

Nominator's rationale: Contains a single article and is unhelpful for navigation. Merge also to Category:Buildings and structures in Ankara. AusLondonder (talk) 11:45, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:59, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Shopping malls in Al Rayyan

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Shopping malls in Qatar and Category:Al Rayyan. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 19:47, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Shopping malls in Al Rayyan to Category:Shopping malls in Qatar

Nominator's rationale: Contains a single article and is unhelpful for navigation. Merge also to Category:Al Rayyan. AusLondonder (talk) 11:29, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: do you support a dual merge, as suggested by nom? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @HouseBlaster: correct. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 18#Category:Mosques of Leicestershire

Category:Streets in Crawley and Nedlands

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Streets in Crawley and Nedlands to Category:Streets in Perth, Western Australia

Nominator's rationale: Category arbitrarily combining two suburbs of Perth, unclear. Contains one street and a list of streets. Appears to be WP:NONDEF. Propose a merge to parent category. AusLondonder (talk) 10:33, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - at the time it was not arbitrarily, and for the record there were real life attempts in collaboration to work on the process of expanding material about streets in Perth. Seems to have died a death, some time ago. JarrahTree 10:42, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, also because of lack of sufficient content. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:45, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Oronzio De Nora

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Oronzio De Nora (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category that does not appear warranted as it contains only the company founded by the subject and his nephew who is notable for other reasons. AusLondonder (talk) 10:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the three articles currently in this category, a fourth article which I plan to work on about Amuchina which Oronzio De Nora invented would also be in this category. Is there a minimum number of articles needed to warrant a category? I have seen many categories with less than 4 articles. Possummayhem (talk) 15:50, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the category only contains articles which are only loosely associated with the subject. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See related Category:Industrie De Nora S.p.A. Gjs238 (talk) 14:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added Matteo de Nora to Category:Industrie De Nora S.p.A. since that is where he works but it was removed... I may be misunderstanding how to use categories. Possummayhem (talk) 02:05, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That is right, categories should contain articles about the topic of the category. For mere mention of a topic we have the "what links here" feature. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:06, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Labor disputes in Mali

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Mali (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only article in this category is 2020 Malian protests not a specific industrial dispute. Unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 08:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:2020s debut plays

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:2020s debut plays (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: I would like to propose Category:2020s debut plays for deletion; the scope of the category is near-identical to Category:2020s plays (recording the year/decade that a play is first performed) but also as the category, two-and-a-half years after creation, has only had two articles added to it. It is, in my opinion, redundant and requires deletion.--OGBC1992 (talk) 06:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This nomination was malformed and has been fixed. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 15:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the articles are already more specifically in Category:2022 plays and Category:2023 plays. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in principle – this is part of Category:Debut plays – not for the first production date of all plays, but only plays that were the writer's first play produced. Compare the comprehensive parent Category:Plays by period. Your misunderstanding was justifiable, as the explanation displayed was inadequate. I have now revised template that provides the explanatory text,[5] making it more like e.g. Category:2020s debut novels. But delete for now as neither A Different Stage (musical) nor Boys from the Blackstuff (play) were debut plays (for Tim Firth or James Graham (playwright) respectively)! – Fayenatic London 13:08, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Statues of Simón Bolívar

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Statues of Simón Bolívar in the United States to Category:Statues of Simón Bolívar
Propose merging Category:Statues of Simón Bolívar in Venezuela to Category:Statues of Simón Bolívar

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to parent cat. Unnecessary intersection between person and location. Omnis Scientia (talk) 04:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, I do not object to these categories per se, but currently they are not well-populated. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:24, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Plaza Bolívar (Valencia) could be added to Category:Statues in Venezuela, although it's not only about a statue. The other members are already within national categories for statues. – Fayenatic London 13:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Film and television memes

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 but purge of things for which it is not defining. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Film and television memes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category currently looks like a trivial and non-defining mess. It is filled with all of these different things known for their status as a meme. However not every single article in this category mentions the existence of a meme, and the redirects aren't helpful either because no sources can be applied to them. Furthermore, only very few out of the 329 pages in this category are for the individual memes themselves such as Truck-kun. Should we only include the individual memes, we would be left with less than 20 articles (no redirects included). If you are willing to oppose this request, please think for a minute and read this previous discussion that lead to the deletion of Category:Music memes [6]

QuantumFoam66 (talk) 04:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Purge, a category of almost 20 articles is still worthwhile to keep. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as this is part of multiple subcats of Category:Internet memes and is similar to Category:Video game memes (which has been around since 2005), so there is precedent for these types of cats. What could rather be beneficial is proposing a split of one cat for "films and television subject to internet memes" and another one pertaining to the memes themselves. Trailblazer101 (talk) 00:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Purge. However, if a purge cannot be done or this category is again filled with this many unrelated entries, then it's better to just delete then have this cruft. For a page to fit this category it has to be about the meme, not something that mentions the meme, not a character that appears in the meme. Gonnym (talk) 10:34, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Malaysian hoteliers to Category:Malaysian businesspeople

Nominator's rationale: Only has 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 03:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge – I tried populating it with PetScan, but all I could find was Gaston Dutronquoy (who might barely count as a Malaysian hotelier, by a technicality). jlwoodwa (talk) 04:03, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to North Macedonia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:North Macedonia–United Kingdom relations. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to North Macedonia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation as only contains a list article, List of ambassadors of the United Kingdom to North Macedonia, which is already appropriately categorised. AusLondonder (talk) 03:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge for now – the list only has redlinks. I don't think the list article is already appropriately categorised – what about Category:North Macedonia–United Kingdom relations? Also, for future reference, this could have been speedied under WP:C2F. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you are right I will add that category. AusLondonder (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/delete per above discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to Guinea-Bissau

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. Categorization of Laurence O'Keeffe can be discussed at Talk:Laurence O'Keeffe. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to Guinea-Bissau (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article for someone who served as a non-resident ambassador. Pointless and unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 03:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete agree with nom. LibStar (talk) 03:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Ambassadors to Guinea-Bissau, as I am not sure we should remove ambassadors if they are non-resident. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:33, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My concern with that is where someone has simultaneously served as ambassador to multiple countries (six in the case of the only article in this category, five non-resident) it creates major category bloat. Take a look at Laurence O'Keeffe. AusLondonder (talk) 07:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Years in Shigatse

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:1973 in Shigatse
Propose deleting Category:1984 in Shigatse
Propose deleting Category:1991 in Shigatse
Propose deleting Category:1998 in Shigatse
Propose deleting Category:2010 in Shigatse
Propose deleting Category:2011 in Shigatse
Propose deleting Category:2014 in Shigatse
Propose deleting Category:2017 in Shigatse
Propose deleting Category:2022 in Shigatse
Propose deleting Category:Years in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024
Propose deleting Category:1343 in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024
Propose deleting Category:Decades in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024
Propose deleting Category:1340s in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024
Propose deleting Category:1970s in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024
Propose deleting Category:1980s in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024
Propose deleting Category:1990s in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024
Propose deleting Category:2010s in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024
Propose deleting Category:2020s in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024
Propose deleting Category:Centuries in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024
Propose deleting Category:20th century in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024
Propose deleting Category:21st century in Shigatse — added 7 October 2024

Nominator's rationale: delete, this tree exclusively contains buildings and structures which we never put directly in a year category. For countries we have "establishments by year" categories but I have never seen that for cities. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not enough contents to divide by year. I also added some more categories like it. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Has not been tagged for a full week. If there are no further comments in a week, we are all set for deletion :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

October 9

Category:Sexual assaults in the United Kingdom

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:31, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Sexual assaults in the United Kingdom (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category about "sexual assaults" which contains only a redirect to a sexual assault referral centre. Serves no purpose. AusLondonder (talk) 23:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now per nom, without prejudice against re-creation if it can be populated by at least 5 WP:DEF items. NLeeuw (talk) 06:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 13:08, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:121st United States Congress

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:14, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:121st United States Congress (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation as only contains a redirect and a subcat full of redirects. Serves no purpose. AusLondonder (talk) 22:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{United States Senate elections category}} puts Category:2028 United States Senate elections in this by default so otherwise it'd be a redlink category. I don't see how deletion would improve anything, especially as this category will eventually become more populated. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's actually no need for that category either, as it currently contains a single existing article and dozens of redirects which should not be categorised per WP:RCAT. AusLondonder (talk) 22:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, what's the point of not having a category here? All of those redirects will become full articles eventually. I'm not seeing how anyone benefits from deletion. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't generally create categories before they're actually needed. Someone clicking on Category:2028 United States Senate elections is not going to find a sea of redirects all to the same article useful for navigation. It's effectively a WP:C2F case. AusLondonder (talk) 01:29, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still not convinced that deletion actually improves anything here. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:59, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this is very premature. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:38, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now per nom, without prejudice against re-creation when it can be populated with at least 5 items that are not redirects and have something substantial to say. Write these articles first. Also WP:CRYSTAL: although it is highly likely that the next U.S. general election will take place in early November 2028, it is possible for the U.S. general election not to take place in 2028. In special circumstances, Congress and States have the power (within certain limit) to move electoral dates or hold special elections on different dates, although elections cannot be suspended or delayed indefinitely (assuming the USA state apparatus will still function within its constitutional framework by then). At any rate, these elections are simply too far into the future to already grant them an elaborate category structure without substantial content. NLeeuw (talk) 06:32, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Category:Defunct airlines of Réunion

Category:Defunct airlines of Guadeloupe

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Category:Defunct airlines of Guadeloupe

Category:User-specific file copyright templates

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 17#Category:User-specific file copyright templates

Category:Herbert Sutcliffe

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:14, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Herbert Sutcliffe (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary eponymous parent category for a single related article. WP:OCEPON. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Maki (singer)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Maki (singer) songs and restructure. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Maki (singer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The main article, a template (that shouldn't even be categorized in a mainspace category) and two song articles are simply not enough to currently warrant an eponymous category. Pichpich (talk) 18:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename and restructure per User:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. Also add a description of the category so it is clear what the category is about. Isoceles-sai (talk) 17:51, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Maki (singer) songs to fit under the Songs by artist category scheme and remove the main article and template. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm ok with that. Pichpich (talk) 21:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename and restructure per User:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. – Fayenatic London 11:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Airliner bombings in the United States

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Category:Airliner bombings in the United States

Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by missile shootdowns

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by missile shootdowns

Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by fighter aircraft shootdowns

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by fighter aircraft shootdowns

Category:Constituencies of the National Assembly of Botswana (historic)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 Category:Constituencies of the National Assembly of Botswana (historic) to Category:Historic constituencies of the National Assembly of Botswana, and dual upmerge the subcategories to the newly renamed Category:Historic constituencies of the National Assembly of Botswana and the relevant Constituencies in FOO category. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:25, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Constituencies of the National Assembly of Botswana (historic) to Category:Former constituencies of Botswana
Propose ~~deleting~~ merging Category:Defunct Botswana constituencies to the above

Nominator's rationale: Consistency with parent Category:Former constituencies. The "defunct" category duplicates the content. – Fayenatic London 13:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support deleting "Category:Defunct Botswana constituencies" and oppose the proposal to rename "Category:Constituencies of the National Assembly of Botswana (historic) to Category:Former constituencies of Botswana", I think it serves as a good parent cat as is.

Aficionado538 (talk) 14:26, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed deletion to merger as Aficionado538 has added two more to the "Defunct" category. As for the name, no others in Category:Former constituencies append "(historic)", but some start with "Historic" rather than "Former". Can we compromise on Category:Historic constituencies of the National Assembly of Botswana? – Fayenatic London 11:46, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. Aficionado538 (talk) 11:51, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments are welcome on whether to also nominate the sub-cats for merging to both parents in each case. – Fayenatic London 13:40, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per nom's question, it certainly makes sense to upmerge the subcategories with 1 1 2 articles. The current scheme is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will add the subcategories to this nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:51, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no opinion on whether this is a good idea or not. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principle, these aren't helpful for navigation, but dual merge, also to their other parent category. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:15, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I have amended the list, adding the other parents. – Fayenatic London 11:46, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Recipients of KLF Award

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:33, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Recipients of KLF Award (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Single entry, limited scope. Veldsenk (talk) 13:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, also per WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's not treated as defining in that one article; mentioned in passing. - RevelationDirect (talk) 15:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom & discussion above. Ratnahastin (talk) 05:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:LGBTQ-related suicides

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Category:LGBTQ-related suicides

Category:People of Mexican side in the Texas Revolution

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Mexican Republic combatants of the Texas Revolution. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:31, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:People of Mexican side in the Texas Revolution to Category:Mexican people of the Texas Revolution

Nominator's rationale: The current name sounds awkward and is confusing/inconsistent Mason (talk) 01:53, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Technically both sides were Mexican people when the revolution started. Perhaps Category:Pro-Mexico people of the Texas Revolution? Marcocapelle (talk) 06:47, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:36, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I don't love the suggestion, but it is an improvement. Mason (talk) 11:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment both suggestions seem awkwardly worded and somewhat ambiguous ("Pro-Mexico people" could include, for example, Pope Gregory XVI). ~~Suggest Category:Mexican Republic combatants in the Texas Revolution.~~ Carguychris (talk) 19:52, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is fine with me. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison: Thoughts on this name? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's pretty good. I think it should say "of" not "in" because the norm for wars/conflicts is "of". Mason (talk) 03:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison, @Marcocapelle, @HouseBlaster, agreed. Category:Mexican Republic combatants of the Texas Revolution it shall be. Will edit my initial post momentarily. Carguychris (talk) 20:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Mason's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, "of" is used more often. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It depends.

If we want to include only regular military personnel of Mexico, then the name should be Mexican military personnel of the Texas Revolution (somewhat equivalent to sibling Category:Army of the Republic of Texas personnel killed in the Texas Revolution, except that not all of them were killed).
If we want to include regular military personnel AND irregular combatants, but exclude civilians, then Mexican Republic combatants of the Texas Revolution is the best option per Carguychris (& Mason).
If we want to include all civilian, regular and irregular participants, then Pro-Mexican people of the Texas Revolution is the best option per Category:Pro-Russian people of the Russo-Ukrainian War and Category:Pro-Ukrainian people of the Russo-Ukrainian War. NLeeuw (talk) 06:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like all articles in this category is military personnel. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, @Nederlandse Leeuw, I thought "combatants" would be better because I'm concerned that a standalone category for irregulars and militia would be extremely small and would probably wind up CfD'd. If we want to include regular military personnel AND irregular combatants, but exclude civilians, then Mexican Republic combatants of the Texas Revolution is the best option... Yes, that was my intent. Carguychris (talk) 20:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then I support Option 2 Mexican Republic combatants as well (thus including irregulars, but excluding civilians like Pope Gregory XVI). Looks like we're heading for a consensus. NLeeuw (talk) 22:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me! Mason (talk) 22:31, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Southend-on-Sea (district)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 with no prejudice against speedy renomination. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Southend-on-Sea (district) to Category:Southend-on-Sea

Nominator's rationale: As per discussion at AFD for County Borough of Southend-on-Sea, the boundaries for the city and district are the same. Eastbourne is good example of this which has one category for the whole town and district.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 06:15, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eastbourne is not the same as it is completely unparished unlike Southend (and as noted below the district article was kept). Southend actually has 3 potential definitions that we could use namely the smallest being the part of the district which has "Southend-on-Sea" as the post town, the next smallest being the unparished area which roughly covers both Southend and Westcliff-on-Sea post towns namely excluding Leigh-on-Sea parish and the largest being the whole district. There is also Southend Urban Area but in 2021 the was urban areas/BUAs seems to have changed so it may not still exist. That said I'm not sure maintaining separate categories for the settlement/unparished area and district is helpful as categories are generally less granular than articles so it may well be better to just merge all into 1 category covering all definitions. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But the parished area (leigh) falls within the wider Southend UA border. If anything Leigh should have its own category? Davidstewartharvey (talk) 10:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Leigh probably should have its own category namely for the area covered by the parish. We have other parishes with categories, see Category:Civil parishes in Essex. All the other articles that are in the unparished area could go in the categories for the settlement. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The latter category is for the traditional town of Southend-on-Sea, not the wider district. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the case of somewhere like Colchester, where the boundaries of the district are outside the city boundaries I can understand having separate categories (Colchester (town) and Boroughof Colchester), but Southend District and city boundaries are the same. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 10:57, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:48, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As there isn't any evidence so far that the district and the town wouldn't be coterminous, we should just follow what happened in article space. A downmerge seems to be the obvious consequence. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 Southend-on-Sea (district)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 with no prejudice against speedy renomination. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Southend-on-Sea (district) to Category:People from Southend-on-Sea

Nominator's rationale: As per AFD at County Borough of Southend-on-Sea, the boundaries between City and district are the same. Also there are individual category pages for suburbs of Southend.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 06:24, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The latter category is for people from the traditional town of Southend-on-Sea, not the wider district, hence the subcats of the district category. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- So what is the traditional town of Southend? Read any history book and the town is seen as the whole not its parts after they were absorbed into the district. Also Colchester only has one category, People from Colchester, and then separate categories for the other localities in the district, which Southend does with People from Westcliff-on-Sea and People from Leigh on Sea already existing. Therefore a district category is not required.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 11:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - We could use Category:People Southend-on-Sea (district) as a Container category with People from Westcliff-on-Sea etc linked to that? And have a separate People from Southend-on-Sea- much like London has?

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:09, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As there isn't any evidence so far that the district and the town wouldn't be coterminous, we should just follow what happened in article space. A downmerge seems to be the obvious consequence. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:33, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Department stores in Southend-On-Sea (town)

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

The result of the discussion was: no consensus with no prejudice against speedy renomination. Typos can be fixed following the process at WP:CFDS (see WP:C2A). House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Department stores in Southend-On-Sea (town) to Category:Department stores of Southend-on-Sea

Nominator's rationale: Southend is now a city. As per afd on County Borough of Southend-on-Sea, there is no differentation between the city and district boundaries.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 06:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its incorrectly capitalized so should be moved to Category:Department stores in Southend-on-Sea (town) if kept as is but it maybe can just go to the base name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:59, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This should follow in line with the other two discussions on this and the next log page. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:35, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Professorships in theology

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Professorships in theology to Category:Professorships in divinity

Nominator's rationale: Overlaping underpopulated category Mason (talk) 03:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or reverse merge per nom. Correct me if I am wrong, but I suspect that "divinity" is the older form and "theology" is more modern. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge up per nom. Side note, my anecdotal understanding is that "divinity" is the more ancient name for the discipline (reflected in degrees, professorships etc) ~~and I was surprised not see this discussed at Theology § History of academic discipline~~. Divinity (academic discipline) exists but that section of the Theology article is a bit of a mess... but that's a discussion for elsewhere. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 07:47, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by auxiliary equipment failure

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Aviation accidents and incidents involving engineering failures. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by auxiliary equipment failure (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category name is excessively vague and therefore violates WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. There is little agreement in the aviation community as to what constitutes "auxiliary equipment". Carguychris (talk) 17:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please suggest a merge target. Mason (talk) 21:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is difficult given the ambiguity of the current name. The sole current article in the category, TWA Flight 529, crashed due to an elevator failure. Perhaps Category:Aviation accidents and incidents involving flight control failure? The underlying issue is the lack of a consistent, unambiguous definition for "auxiliary equipment". "Flight control" is considerably easier to define, but is also ambiguous to some degree. All that being said, I'm also concerned that creating myriad aircraft accident categories by cause may lead to WP:ARBITRARYCAT and WP:NARROWCAT concerns. Carguychris (talk) 21:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or delete. The default in a case like this is to merge it to the parent category(ies), in this case Category:Aviation accidents and incidents involving engineering failures. If that is not an appropriate merge target in this case, I'd like to hear why not. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's merge target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge per Marco. Mason (talk) 22:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Religion in the Middle East

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. A nomination to merge West Asia(n) to Middle East(ern) might find consensus, but there is not consensus to do anything in this particular discussion. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 17:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Religion in the Middle East to Category:Religion in West Asia
Propose renaming Category:Religion in the Middle East by city to Category:Religion in West Asia by city
Propose renaming Category:Christianity in the Middle East by city to Category:Christianity in West Asia by city
Propose renaming Category:Jews and Judaism in the Middle East by city to Category:Jews and Judaism in West Asia by city
Propose merging Category:Islam in the Middle East to Category:Islam in West Asia
Propose renaming Category:Secularism in the Middle East to Category:Secularism in West Asia
Propose renaming Category:Irreligion in the Middle East to Category:Irreligion in West Asia
Propose merging Category:Jews and Judaism in the Middle East to Category:Jews and Judaism in West Asia
Propose merging Category:Christianity in the Middle East to Category:Christianity in West Asia
Propose merging Category:Bahá'í Faith in the Middle East to Category:Bahá'í Faith in West Asia
Propose merging Category:Middle Eastern people by religion to Category:West Asian people by religion
Propose merging Category:Middle Eastern Jews to Category:West Asian Jews
Propose merging Category:Middle Eastern Muslims to Category:West Asian Muslims
Propose renaming Category:Middle Eastern Islamists to Category:West Asian Islamists
Propose merging Category:Middle Eastern Christians to Category:West Asian Christians
Propose merging Category:Middle Eastern Bahá'ís to Category:West Asian Bahá'ís
Propose renaming Category:Middle Eastern atheists to Category:West Asian atheists
Propose renaming Category:Middle Eastern agnostics to Category:West Asian agnostics

Nominator's rationale: West Asia and the Middle East largely overlap, so we do not need both category trees. It is better to keep West Asia because it is consistent with other subcategories in Category:Religion in Asia by region. Sakakami (talk) 18:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or reverse merge per nom and rename dependent on the merge direction. There is also this discussion which is still open. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly oppose - The reason these categories "largely overlap" is entirely because the regions themselves "largely overlap". An incovenient fact, perhaps, but a reality that Wikipedia is bound to respect - and that our categories must reflect. (There are many other overlapping category trees that we maintain simply because they reflect aspects of the real world.) Furthermore, the term "Middle East" is well-known to the great majority of readers, who are unlikely to be familiar with the term "West Asia". Anomalous 0 (talk) 07:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Anomalous 0's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I presume that overlapping categories nearly always match with overlapping realities, so I can't see that as a reason for not applying WP:OVERLAPCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:18, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Middle East is a more common name than West Asia. Andre🚐 00:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's response to the objection?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose and reverse merge per the ridiculously one-sided Ngram of "Middle East" vs. "West Asia" vs. "Western Asia", and WP:OVERLAPCAT. Countries get dropped in either direction, so it makes the most sense to choose the direction that's least WP:ASTONISHing. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 12:42, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - LTA sock removing "Middle East"/moving "Middle East" to "West Asia". ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 17:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag the West Asian categories to allow for a reverse merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Religion in West Asia to Category:Religion in the Middle East
Propose merging Category:Islam in West Asia to Category:Islam in the Middle East
Propose merging Category:Jews and Judaism in West Asia to Category:Jews and Judaism in the Middle East
Propose merging Category:Christianity in West Asia to Category:Christianity in the Middle East
Propose merging Category:Bahá'í Faith in West Asia to Category:Bahá'í Faith in the Middle East
Propose merging Category:West Asian people by religion to Category:Middle Eastern people by religion
Propose merging Category:West Asian Jews to Category:Middle Eastern Jews
Propose merging Category:West Asian Muslims to Category:Middle Eastern Muslims
Propose merging Category:West Asian Christians to Category:Middle Eastern Christians
Propose merging Category:West Asian Bahá'ís to Category:Middle Eastern Bahá'ís
No opinion on whether this is a good idea or not. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support reverse merge from West Asia to Middle East & support reverting/reversing all of nom's similar edits. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 11:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose reverse merge from West Asia to Middle East, as the Caucasus is not generally considered part of the Middle East. Perhaps it makes best sense to keep both. Purge and restructure where appropriate to avoid duplication; places that have a Middle East parent don't need to be directly in a West Asia grandparent. – Fayenatic London 12:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With a reverse merge we can and should purge Caucasian countries. I do not regard this as an objection to merging per se. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:51, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- What sort of purge? I would oppose removal altogether from the hierarchy of Category:West Asia. That has immediate subcats for Caucasus and Middle East, and Aronlee90 has recently created Religion in the Caucasus, so perhaps a good outcome would be to populate that more fully, and to add Category:Caucasus people within West Asian people. – Fayenatic London 14:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Church of Sweden clergymen in Colonial North America

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Church of Sweden clergy from the Thirteen Colonies. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Church of Sweden clergymen in Colonial North America to Category:American Lutheran clergy

Nominator's rationale: This category is extremely narrow. I think it should either be merged to 17th/18th century American Lutheran clergy or renamed to Church of Sweden clergy from the Thirteen Colonies Mason (talk) 03:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If not kept then delete, because all articles are already in Category:17th-century American Lutheran clergy or Category:18th-century American Lutheran clergy. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as Church of Sweden clergy from the Thirteen Colonies; much better than my original. Creuzbourg (talk) 13:33, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:13, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If not merged/deleted, then rename as Creuzbourg suggested. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per Creuzbourg and reparent accordingly. – Fayenatic London 12:08, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My rationale for a separate, albeit small, category is that these clerics were paid for by the Swedish government, until U.S. independence. The background is found in the close connections between the Church of Sweden and the Church of England. Jesper Svedberg, the first bishop in charge of Swedish Lutheran clergy in America, saw the C of E as a sister church to the C of S. There are several more individuals that eventually can be added. The category is of importance for Swedish-American and Swedish history. Creuzbourg (talk) 14:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Prohibition-era gangsters

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 17#Category:Prohibition-era gangsters

Category:Urdu-language women writers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Category:Urdu-language women writers

Category:Indian women translators

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:26, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:Indian women translators to Category:Indian translators and Category:Indian women linguists

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between nationality, gender, and genre of writing, per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 13:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree in principle, but I wonder about Category:Indian women linguists as a target: is every translator by definition a linguist? Also, merging to Category:Indian translators doesn't seem necessary since the articles are already in a century subcat of it. So perhaps simply delete. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:03, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcoapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was basing the target on the fact that it's typically a parent category, but I haven't thought deeply about whether translators are also defined as being linguists. Mason (talk) 02:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So then I suppose it can be deleted instead of merged. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yep Mason (talk) 12:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Category:Louisville Black Caps

October 8

Category:Society of Ukrainian Progressors members

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Category:Society of Ukrainian Progressors members

Category:Subatomic particle symbol templates

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Subatomic particle symbol templates to Category:Physics formatting templates

Nominator's rationale: Bot-created single-page cat. Looks like it just contains a helper for Template:Subatomic particle? Dunno if should merge into that cat, no opinion whatsoever, just listing bit of botcruft for cleanup. Slowking Man (talk) 20:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Early abbots by century

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Early abbots by century

Category:Jainism in India by city

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

The result of the discussion was: merge. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:11, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Jainism in India by city to Category:Jainism in India and Category:Jainism in Asia by city

Nominator's rationale: merge for now, surprisingly few articles in this categories. By all means recreate when more articles are available. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

North American Indigenous categories

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 and keep redirects. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename Category:Anti-indigenous racism in North America to Category:Anti-Indigenous racism in North America

Rename Category:Genocide of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Genocide of Indigenous peoples of North America

Rename Category:Anti-indigenous racism in the United States to Category:Anti-Indigenous racism in the United States

Rename Category:Assimilation of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Assimilation of Indigenous peoples of North America

Rename Category:People of indigenous North American descent to Category:People of Indigenous North American descent

Rename Category:History of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:History of Indigenous peoples of North America

Rename Category:History of indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest to Category:History of Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest

Rename Category:Treaties of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Treaties of Indigenous peoples of North America

Rename Category:Wars involving the indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Wars involving the Indigenous peoples of North America

Rename Category:American people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:American people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Puerto Rican people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Puerto Rican people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Belizean people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Belizean people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Cuban people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Cuban people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Dominica people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Dominica people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Dominican Republic people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Dominican Republic people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Guatemalan people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Guatemalan people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Haitian people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Haitian people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Honduran people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Honduran people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Mexican people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Mexican people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Panamanian people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Panamanian people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Salvadoran people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Salvadoran people of Indigenous peoples descent

Rename Category:Trinidad and Tobago people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Trinidad and Tobago people of Indigenous peoples descent

Nominator's rationale: Capitalize the word "Indigenous", as capitalization is the common practice in North America and on Wikipedia when referring to the Indigenous peoples of North America. This capitalization would be in line with the recommendations of the Associated Press, APA Style, the Chicago Manual of Style, the United Nations, and the Native American Journalists Association. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 16:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support This brings categories more in line with the articles' titles, so makes perfect sense. Yuchitown (talk) 23:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Long overdue in my opinion. --Pinchme123 (talk) 00:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, and as for some of the nationality categories, simply "Indigenous descent" would roll off the tongue better than "Indigenous peoples descent". Salmoonlight (talk) 18:53, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the word Indigenous should be capitalized in these titles as they refer to people (not plants or rocks). This is in keeping with academic sources, and major manuals of style such as the AP, the Chicago MOS, and the Native American Journalists Association. Netherzone (talk) 14:11, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If carried, redirect all as this capitalisation is currently not standard within Category:People of indigenous peoples descent by nationality. – Fayenatic London 10:44, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I echo the need for a redirect. Mason (talk) 20:25, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Museums with wikis

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

The result of the discussion was: listify and delete. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Convert Category:Museums with wikis to article List of museum wikis

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining feature of a museum. It's probably interesting enough to be made into a list. Mason (talk) 12:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, possibly listify. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Addis Standard people

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Addis Standard people (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is the only subcategory in Category:Journalists by publication that has but a single article. Most of them have a fairly substantial number, though I did spot a couple with only 4 articles. 76.9.91.187 (talk) 09:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. There is no need to merge somewhere as far I can see, the article is already in Category:Ethiopian journalists. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:38, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. – Fayenatic London 10:51, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Majority-minority cities and towns in in McHenry County, Illinois

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:25, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Majority-minority cities and towns in in McHenry County, Illinois (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is an empty category with a repeated "in" in the title, which is pretty much useless because its parent category contains two such entities and it's only gotten 16 views in its lifetime (equating to only slightly more than two every 115 days, which is really small). I'm not sure we really need it for those reasons. Regards, SONIC 678 05:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, useless redirect. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:48, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Pointers to WMF tools

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Toolforge tools. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:26, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Pointers to WMF tools to Category:Pointers to Toolforge tools

Nominator's rationale: None of these tools are maintained by the WMF. I suspect the creator meant "WMF Labs", but that name has been replaced by Toolforge now. Legoktm (talk) 04:23, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The category currently has four members, three of which are indeed Toolforge tools (Wikipedia:AfD stats, Wikipedia:Editor Interaction Analyzer, Wikipedia:XfD stats). Wikipedia:Quick intersection is not, but it's historical and it could probably just be upmerged to the parent (Category:Wikimedia Cloud Services) instead. I agree that this category should be called Toolforge rather than WMF.

However, Category:Toolforge tools already exists, with three members: User:Guy Keogh/verify is a soft redirect, Wikipedia:Tools/RAMP editor is historical, and Wikipedia:NPP Browser is a normal page. I don't think there's a significant difference between these two categories, or enough members that we need to subcategorize the "pointers". Therefore, instead of renaming, I propose to merge Category:Pointers to WMF tools into Category:Toolforge tools. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds good to me, thanks. Legoktm (talk) 15:24, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Government organizations of Indonesia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:26, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Government organizations of Indonesia to Category:Government of Indonesia

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layer. This category doesn't help navigation Mason (talk) 03:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added three subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support merging was created by a since blocked Indonesian editor who was creating a curious range of red link and since contested categories JarrahTree 06:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, non-standard and unnecessary layer. – Fayenatic London 10:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Second ladies and gentlemen of the Philippines

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Category:Second ladies and gentlemen of the Philippines

Category:Nuclear weapons and the Russian invasion of Ukraine

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Nuclear weapons and the Russian invasion of Ukraine to Category:Nuclear technology and the Russian invasion of Ukraine

Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories. Upmerge. Mason (talk) 02:13, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, but purge Nuclear Orthodoxy isn't really about Ukraine. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
fine with me Mason (talk) 13:09, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Pro–nuclear weapons activists

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Pro–nuclear weapons activists to Category:Nuclear weapons

Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category that's not helpful for navigation. There's only one page in here. Mason (talk) 02:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just delete, I don't think we should put a biography in Category:Nuclear weapons based on one stupid remark of the subject of the article. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Totally fine with me Mason (talk) 13:09, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Blackpink members albums

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Blackpink members albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: There is no scheme for categorizing individual members solo albums by albums by members of groups, and each is already linked from the group's albums category Category:Blackpink albums (which appears to be the standard). For precedent, I found Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 February 19#Category:The Cars' solo albums. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, in the spirit of WP:OCASSOC. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; the subcats are all already correctly linked directly from Category:Blackpink albums. – Fayenatic London 10:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

October 7

Category:Sega Games franchises

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:29, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Sega Games franchises to Category:Sega video game franchises

Nominator's rationale: "Sega Games" is not even its own thing, it literally just refers to Sega. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Did you read the article? It's explained at Sega#2015–2020: Sega Games and Sega Interactive. Nevertheless, it seems the Sega Games name is now defunct, so the move makes sense regardless compared to when it was made in 2019. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:23, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 and, for the latter, broaden. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:29, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Education reports to Category:Reports on education
Propose broadening and renaming Category:Health care reports to Category:Reports on medicine and health

Nominator's rationale: Siblings are Category:Reports on finance and business. The rename makes it clearer that the subject matter of the report is education, rather than a report that educates or is a school assignment. For Health, the rename broadens the category to be more usable Mason (talk) 22:31, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Digital currency exchanges

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:52, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Digital currency exchanges to Category:Cryptocurrency exchanges

Nominator's rationale: Cryptocurrency exchanges is the common term and matches with our Wikipedia article. Gheus (talk) 22:14, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per WP:C2D, this could have been listed at speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:33, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Loss of Canadian citizenship by prior Nazi affiliation

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:People who lost Canadian citizenship and Category:Nazis who fled to Canada. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:53, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Loss of Canadian citizenship by prior Nazi affiliation to Category:Nazis who lost Canadian citizenship

Nominator's rationale: This category is extremely awkwardly named. I've made a tentative attempt, but I'd be really open to alternatives. Mason (talk) 22:22, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a quite narrow intersection, my first choice would be to merge it to Category:People who lost Canadian citizenship and Category:Nazis who fled to Canada. If not merged, rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:58, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge is fine with me. Mason (talk) 21:17, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What's the difference between Category:Loss of Canadian citizenship by prior Nazi affiliation and Category:Nazis deported from Canada? Looking at their members, they mostly overlap but not entirely. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Figured it out – you can be deported without having been a citizen (Konrāds Kalējs), and you can lose your citizenship without being deported (Helmut Oberlander and Walter Obodzinsky). It's a pretty subtle difference, and I'm not sure it needs to be represented in the categories. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:41, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:European theatre of World War II people

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 14#Category:European theatre of World War II people

Category:Populated places in the Middle East

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Populated places in West Asia to Category:Populated places in the Middle East. There is clear consensus that we should only have one category, and rough consensus that this is the preferred merge direction. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Populated places in the Middle East (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: the Middle East and West Asia are very overlapping. All subcategories are already in Category:Populated places in West Asia. Sakakami (talk) 18:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete one of them, per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - For the reasons I laid out above in regarding Category:Religion in the Middle East etc. Also, please note that the subcat for Egypt is NOT part of Category:Populated places in West Asia. Anomalous 0 (talk) 08:03, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Anomalous 0's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:59, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are Category:Populated places in Central Asia, Category:Populated places in South Asia, Category:Populated places in Southeast Asia, and therefore also Category:Populated places in West Asia. On Anomalous 0's comment I should note that WP:OVERLAPCAT does not require that the overlap be 100%. Sakakami (talk) 20:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 21:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and reverse merge per the ridiculously one-sided Ngram of "Middle East" vs. "West Asia" vs. "Western Asia", and WP:OVERLAPCAT. Countries get dropped in either direction, so it makes the most sense to choose the direction that's least WP:ASTONISHing. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 14:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. --MikutoH ^talk! 02:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - LTA sock removing "Middle East"/moving "Middle East" to "West Asia". ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 17:05, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to tag Category:Populated places in West Asia.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Centuries in the Southern Nigeria Protectorate

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

The result of the discussion was: merge/delete as nominated. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Centuries in the Southern Nigeria Protectorate
Propose deleting Category:20th century in the Southern Nigeria Protectorate
Propose merging Category:Years of the 20th century in the Southern Nigeria Protectorate to Category:Years in the Southern Nigeria Protectorate

Nominator's rationale: delete, the Southern Nigeria Protectorate mainly existed within one century, all content is already in the two decade categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 statutory instruments of the Welsh Assembly

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 14#Category:Lists of statutory instruments of the Welsh Assembly

Category:Fictional populated places in Mexico

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:00, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Fictional populated places in Mexico (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The only article in this category is not about a fictional location, but a short story. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:05, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Fictional jackals

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

The result of the discussion was: selective merge. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:00, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Fictional jackals to Category:Fictional canines

Nominator's rationale: Only contains two articles that are about fictional jackals, the rest are either works that should not belong in a fictional character category, or are redirects. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Selectively merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Selectively merge per nom, this is an unnecessary level of precise detail. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:25, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Events at Yankee Stadium

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 15#Category:Events at Yankee Stadium

Category:Morley–Ellenbrook line

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Morley–Ellenbrook line to Category:Ellenbrook line

Nominator's rationale: The main page has been moved due to a name change, so the category should be too. Steelkamp (talk) 10:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - the operator of the line https://www.metronet.wa.gov.au/news/latest-news/hello-ellenbrook-line agrees with that JarrahTree 10:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per the spirit of WP:CONSUB. (For future reference, this could have been speedily renamed under C2D.) jlwoodwa (talk) 16:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust to Category:Hampshire and Isle of Wight Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust

Nominator's rationale: This trust has now been merged and renamed, see the article at Hampshire and Isle of Wight Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust Elshad (talk) 10:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Diseases and disorders

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 15#Category:Diseases and disorders

Category:AAGPBL teams

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 15#Category:AAGPBL teams

Category:Collaborators during World War II occupations

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Collaborators during World War II. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:23, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Collaborators during World War II occupations to Category:Collaborators during World War II (people)

Nominator's rationale: This name is *really* confusing. I suggest changing it from occupation to (people) to make it clearer that this is about individuals. I'm very open to alternatives. Mason (talk) 13:58, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison: what is your confusion about? (It is not confusing to me and it seems entirely obvious that it is about people.) Marcocapelle (talk) 03:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When I saw the word occupations, I expected to see subcategories like Spies, Double-agents or something related to the occupation of the collaborators. It also seemed from the name to be the child category of People of World War II by occupation. I was able to figure it out pretty quickly one I looked at the contents, but it didn't line up with my expectations when I looked at the contents. Mason (talk) 03:20, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I see. The word "occupations" can be removed for sure. I still think adding "(people)" is rather unnecessary - but I am also not vehemently against it. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:37, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  I'd be fine with just removing the word "occupations" a.k.a. Category:Collaborators during World War II. I agree that (people) would be unnecessary. Mason (talk) 21:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Collaborators during World War II as a more concise and less confusing title. Technically this might slightly expand the category's scope, but I don't think that's a problem; for one, its subcategories don't specify "during occupations". jlwoodwa (talk) 16:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:British Asian actors

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 15#Category:British Asian actors

Category:Labor disputes in Ghana

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:25, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:Labor disputes in Ghana to Category:Labor disputes in Africa and Category:Labour in Ghana

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now: Only one page in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 23:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Updated the target after the speedy move).--Ymblanter (talk) 07:31, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ghana is a distinct country and has a specific strike within the category. I think it would be damaging to remove this category and to try to homogeneous it with the broader continent of africa. The lack of more then one strike is more reflective of a systematic bias towards focusing on north america and europe rather than a lack of historical strikes. Thanks, User:LoomCreek (talk)

That bias will probably exist, but the only remedy is having more articles about the topic. As long as that is not the case the category is just a hindrance in finding related articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:15, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are now two articles in the category, the Positive Action campaign which involved a nationwide general strike in 1950 and a played a critical role in Ghana's independence years later. I plan to expand the article to cover all the specifics around it. So I think at this point removing the category would most definitely be detrimental.- LoomCreek (talk) 14:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are too many tiny categories in this tree. Nothing is findable right now. You're welcome to make continental categories if you think that would help. But I think your time is better spent crafting articles. Mason (talk) 21:13, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge for Now with no objection to recreation if/when more content appears, per WP:MFN and WP:NARROWCAT. - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Southern United States independence activists

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:25, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Southern United States independence activists to Category:Neo-Confederates

Nominator's rationale: These seem to be highly overlapping Mason (talk) 04:05, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Per WP:OVERLAPCAT. - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Transgender by country

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Transgender topics in [place]". House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Transgender by country (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Africa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Argentina (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Asia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Australia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Brazil (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Canada (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in China (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in England (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Europe (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Germany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in India (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Ireland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Israel (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Japan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in New Zealand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in North America (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Oceania (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Pakistan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Scotland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in South America (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Spain (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Thailand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in Turkey (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in film (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in television (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in the Middle East (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in the United Kingdom (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose renaming Category:Transgender in the United States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Following Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 13#Category:Transgender in Russia, it seems the problem is Transgender being an adjective, rather than a noun word or noun phrase. Then I think transness is a good alternative solution, as that's the most accepted noun for transgenderness in English, similar to the Francophone equivalents transidentity (transidentité) or transitude, which are less common in English. Another option would be "Transgender topics", which would be more recognizable. --MikutoH ^talk! 01:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative - either Transgender topics or Transgender people. I definitely don’t like transness - as the dictionary entry says, it’s about a condition and that just sounds worse, being transgender isn’t a condition defined by one’s transness, which is why it’s also listed as synonymous with other such terms that are similarly considered to be pejorative nowadays. Raladic (talk) 05:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am neutral to whether or not renaming is necessary. But if we are going to rename, "transgender people" is not a good option because it suggests it is for biographies only. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:36, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support transness I don't see a good alternative to that that makes sense.★Trekker (talk) 10:00, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, but oppose the name "Transness". It's unclear to people who are not familiar with the topic. Either of the alternatives are fine with me, such as Transgender topics in FOO, Transgender rights in FOO, etc. I'd need convincing for Transgender people in FOO because it will get mixed up with FOOian transgender people (a.k.a. nationals of a country who are trans. Mason (talk) 20:09, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it may suggest but so would these. --MikutoH ^talk! 21:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Would you want to change those categories to Womenness? I think that Transgender topics is a better solution than Tranness. Mason (talk) 21:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think MikutoH's point is that, e.g., Category:Women in Canada could be mistaken for its biography-holding subcategory Category:Canadian women. Despite that potential ambiguity, that naming structure is, to my ears, miles better than changing the parent to Women's topics in Canada. I think the same applies here.--Trystan (talk) 12:47, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, prefer transgender topics for now. The adjective has bugged me for some time, but I haven't been able to come up with a better term myself. Transness is too specific and rather obscure. I thought of Transgender issues in Foo, but that conveys a non-neutral tone. Topics sounds a bit meta/redundant (every Wikipedia category covers a topic), but is probably the best option, unless someone can come up with something else. --Paul_012 (talk) 02:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm inclined against Transgender people in Foo, as it's easy to confuse with Fooian transgender people. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:22, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support for transgender topics in lieu of a better suggestion. Both the current titles and transness are confusing titles, with the latter being just an obscure neologism.
Support Transgender people in Foo. It would be consistent with Category:Women by country, which uses Women in Foo and not Women's topics in Foo. 1857a (talk) 23:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Transgender people in Foo per 1857a. That is in inescapably the best and clearest description of the unifying topic of the subcategories and articles these categories contain. Transgender history is the history of transgender people, transgender rights are the rights of transgender people, etc. The category description can specify to use the Fooian transgender people subcategory for individual biographies.--Trystan (talk) 12:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Transgender topics for now. Language is evolving quickly here so we may have to revisit this, but this seems like the clearest and neutralist terminology for now. (Open to altnernatives except for "transness" which seems unclear to me.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Transgender topics per RevelationDirect. Transness is a very uncommon word for this topic area. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 05:46, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Local politicians by nationality

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

The result of the discussion was: keep. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Local politicians by country (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Local politicians by nationality
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Argentina (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Argentine local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local government politicians in Australia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Australian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Austria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Austrian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Azerbaijan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Azerbaijani local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Belgium (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Belgian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Bolivia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Bolivian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Cyprus (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Cypriot local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Canada (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Canadian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in the Central African Republic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Central African Republic local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Chile (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Chilean local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Finland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Finnish local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in France (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:French local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Denmark (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Danish local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Estonia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Estonian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Germany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:German local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Ireland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Irish local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Israel (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Israeli local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Italy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Italian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Japan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Japanese local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Kenya (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Kenyan local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Korea (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Korean local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Kyrgyzstan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Kyrgyzstani local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Malaysia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Malaysian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Mexico (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Mexican local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in the Netherlands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Dutch local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in New Zealand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:New Zealand local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Nigeria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Nigerian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Norway (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Norwegian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Pakistan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Pakistani local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in the Philippines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Filipino local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Poland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Polish local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Portugal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Portuguese local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Romania (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Romanian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in San Marino (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Sammarinese local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in the Solomon Islands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Solomon Islands local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in South Korea (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:South Korean local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Spain (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Spanish local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Sri Lanka (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Sri Lankan local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Sweden (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Swedish local politicans
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Switzerland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Swiss local politicans
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Turkey (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Turkish local politicans
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Ukraine (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Ukrainian local politicans
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in the United Kingdom (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:British local politicans
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in the United States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:American local politicans
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in England (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:English local politicans
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Scotland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Scottish local politicans
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Wales (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Welsh local politicans
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Guinea (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Guinean local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Guinea-Bissau (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Bissau-Guinean local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in India (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Indian local politicians
Propose renaming Category:Local politicians in Indonesia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Indonesian local politicians

Nominator's rationale: Consistensy with (grand)parents, some cousins/siblings, and some children. --MikutoH ^talk! 01:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I've made a couple of minor modifications to fix obvious spelling errors ("Keynian" instead of "Kenyan", "New Zealan" instead of "New Zealand", "Belguian" instead of "Belgian"). Bearcat (talk) 01:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I apologize for the mistakes. However, New Zealand is the adjective for NZ people: Category:New_Zealand_politicians. We need to rename the entire category tree if that's right. --MikutoH ^talk! 01:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say it wasn't. But you typed "Zealan", as in without the d on the end of it. Bearcat (talk) 02:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OOps sorry I confused it. Yeah it was a typo, my keyboard may have eaten it. --MikutoH ^talk! 02:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This nomination appear to be based on the expectation that, for example, Category:Local politicians in Ireland is intended as a set of local politicians from Ireland. When, as far as I can tell, it is a set of local politicians in Ireland. (Citizenship and nationality are not, presumably, the same thing as representation or location. In Ireland, for example, while local representatives must be "ordinarily resident in Ireland" (..) "You do not have to be an Irish citizen".) Are we happy that all of the members of all of these categories are grouped by nationality (as implied by the nom). And not by location/representation (as implied by the category names)? In short, are "local politicians by nationality" the same as "local politicians by nation"? (I'm not personally sure they are...) Guliolopez (talk) 10:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oppose
1. Country is not the same as nation.
2. as noted above, the current categories are about politicians in a country, not from a country (or nation)
3. Specific to Australia, Local government in Australia is a thing. I'd read "local politicians" as being the ones who live near me (or the people they represent) rather than living near where parliament sits or being "parachuted in" to a safe seat. That is particularly about state and federal politicians, local government is much more local in Australia, particularly in some states.

--Scott Davis ^Talk 11:57, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, for Australia - as ScottDavis says, Local government in Australia is not the same as the "local politicians" who live in my area and represent me in the state or federal government. Eg the websites to find my state and federal representatives both refer to my "local member", but neither of these are the councillors in my local government area.

For previous similar discussions, see:

Mitch Ames (talk) 12:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per above. Not all politicians in Foo have Fooinan nationality. Sakakami (talk) 14:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Based on WP:CATNAME it looks like the current format of <political office> in country is correct but I have no objection to the proposal as it brings these categories into line with parent/grandparent categories, particularly Fooinan politicians. Those opposing the nomination maybe confusing citizenship/nationality with adjectival/demonymic forms for countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Obi2canibe (talk • contribs)
Oppose per above commenters. The issue here is that nationality and residency are overlapping but not completely identical conditions — because most countries do permit immigrants (usually, but not necessarily always, immigrants who have naturalized as citizens) to hold political office, there can be a difference between where the person is "from" and where the person did the politics. The intention of Category:Local politicians in Canada, for example, is that the person did the politics in Canada — whereas Category:Canadian local politicians could potentially have to include a Canadian-born-and-raised person who moved to Brazil and did local politics in Brazil, and thus was a "Canadian who did local politics" but not a "person who did local politics in Canada". But the latter is what we're after here, not the former. Bearcat (talk) 21:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per explanations by Scott Davis, Mitch Ames and Bearcat - the notion that local government politicians can be subsumed into local politicians simply does not fit in the local language context in Australia (and probably a lot of the other countries as well), despite Obi2canibes' useful explanation about foo and fitting with category trees. JarrahTree 01:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose re Australia. As others have said, it proposes replacing a category name which is crystal clear in its meaning with one that is confusing and ambiguous. Kerry (talk) 04:38, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Executed Italian fascists

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:23, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:Executed Italian fascists to Category:Italian fascists and Category:Executed Italian people

Nominator's rationale: 2x upmerge. Non-defining 3x intersection between cause of death, nationality, and political orientation. Notably, there's no Category:Executed fascists category tree. Mason (talk) 00:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Some of these people were executed not for ideology alone. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. --MikutoH ^talk! 02:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or delete, I assume the articles are already in Category:National Fascist Party politicians and Category:People executed by Italy by firing squad so that a merge will not be necessary. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

October 6

Category:Yuliy Meitus

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:52, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Yuliy Meitus (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary eponymous category and unnecessary layer for a single article already in an appropriate subcategory for compositions. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:15, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:OCEPON. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Now there are two subcategories and interwiki links. Does it have to be deleted? --Tijd-jp (talk) 15:09, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As everything is interlinked anyway we do not need a parent category. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:37, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 13#Category:German abbesses

Category:Bantu

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 13#Category:Bantu

Category:Back to the Future (franchise) soundtracks

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:52, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Back to the Future (franchise) soundtracks to Category:Music from Back to the Future (franchise)

Nominator's rationale: This category only contains redirects to the Music of the Back to the Future franchise page. Theknine2 (talk) 13:45, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just delete, the target for the redirects, Music of the Back to the Future franchise, is already in Category:Music from Back to the Future (franchise). Marcocapelle (talk) 15:49, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Free compilers and interpreters

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 13#Category:Free compilers and interpreters

Category:1859 establishments in the Kingdom of Lagos

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:1859 establishments in the Kingdom of Lagos to Category:1859 establishments in Africa

Nominator's rationale: merge, this is a single-article article, which is not very helpful for navigation, and we do not even have a category tree Category:Kingdom of Lagos. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:03, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Mason (talk) 21:18, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Jainism by city

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:53, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Jainism by city (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:10, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principle, but would it make more sense to use the broader category rather than Jainism in Asia by city‎? Mason (talk) 21:18, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason to remove the content from the Asian tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:42, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, Probably a good idea to add Jainism by location to the child category then Mason (talk) 01:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The subcategory is already in the location tree because of Asia as a continent. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  @Smasongarrison: Are you okay with deletion? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  yeah its fine Mason (talk) 00:34, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

57 to 63 days old

October 5

Category:Artistic swimming at the 1994 Asian Games

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

The result of the discussion was: rename the 1994 category. The rest were not tagged; I will list them at CFDS instead. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Artistic swimming at the 1994 Asian Games to Category:Synchronized swimming at the 1994 Asian Games
Propose renaming Category:Artistic swimming at the 2002 Asian Games to Category:Synchronized swimming at the 2002 Asian Games
Propose renaming Category:Artistic swimming at the 2006 Asian Games to Category:Synchronized swimming at the 2006 Asian Games
Propose renaming Category:Artistic swimming at the 2010 Asian Games to Category:Synchronized swimming at the 2010 Asian Games
Propose renaming Category:Artistic swimming at the 2014 Asian Games to Category:Synchronized swimming at the 2014 Asian Games
Propose renaming Category:Artistic swimmers at the 1994 Asian Games to Category:Synchronized swimmers at the 1994 Asian Games
Propose renaming Category:Artistic swimmers at the 1998 Asian Games to Category:Synchronized swimmers at the 1998 Asian Games
Propose renaming Category:Artistic swimmers at the 2002 Asian Games to Category:Synchronized swimmers at the 2002 Asian Games
Propose renaming Category:Artistic swimming at the 2006 Asian Games to Category:Synchronized swimmers at the 2006 Asian Games
Propose renaming Category:Artistic swimming at the 2010 Asian Games to Category:Synchronized swimmers at the 2010 Asian Games
Propose renaming Category:Artistic swimming at the 2014 Asian Games to Category:Synchronized swimmers at the 2014 Asian Games

Nominator's rationale: having the same name as the main article based on this discussion Talk:Synchronized swimming at the 2014 Asian Games#Requested move 30 May 2022. Sports2021 (talk) 21:19, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. This could have been listed at speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 22:59, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Mexican California to Category:Alta California

Nominator's rationale: rename per what is presumably the main article of the category. Mexican California redirects to Alta California. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Mason (talk) 18:35, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:British music logos

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:British music logos

Category:Medieval Indian Jain writers

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

The result of the discussion was: alt merge (i.e. just merge the poets to the writers). House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:49, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:12th-century Indian Jain poets to Category:12th-century Jain poets to Category:12th-century Indian Jains and Category:12th-century Indian poets and Category:Medieval Indian Jain poets
Propose merging Category:13th-century Indian Jain poets to to Category:13th-century Jain poets to Category:13th-century Indian Jains and Category:13th-century Indian poets Category:Medieval Indian Jain poets
Propose merging Category:13th-century Indian Jain writers to Category:13th-century Indian writers and Category:13th-century Indian Jains and Category:Medieval Indian Jain writers
Propose merging Category:12th-century Indian Jain writers to Category:12th-century Indian writers and Category:12th-century Indian Jains and Category:Medieval Indian Jain writers
Propose merging Category:10th-century Indian Jain poets to Category:10th-century Jain poets to Category:10th-century Indian Jains and Category:10th-century Indian poets and Category:Medieval Indian Jain poets
Propose merging Category:10th-century Indian Jain writers to Category:10th-century Indian writers and Category:10th-century Indian Jains and Category:Medieval Indian Jain writers
Propose merging Category:9th-century Indian Jain writers to Category:9th-century Indian Jains and Category:9th-century Indian writers Category:Medieval Indian Jain writers

Nominator's rationale: There's really not enough content to justify diffusing Indian Jain writers by century, even without raising the question of whether we should intersection nationality and relgion and occupaiton under EGRS. Perhaps Medieval Indian Jain writers to allow for some structure in the Indian Jain writers tree. Mason (talk) 18:09, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alt merge. I think if we just merge poets to writers that there is enough content. So e.g. Category:10th-century Indian Jain poets to Category:10th-century Indian Jain writers and Category:10th-century Indian poets and Category:Indian Jain poets. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:32, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That would be workable; however, there's not Category:10th-century Jain writers, which was part of my reason for merging to Medieval Indian Jain writers. Thoughts? Mason (talk) 18:38, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- We do not need a broader Category:10th-century Jain writers because they were all Indian people in this period. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:52, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Fair enough. I'm fine with the alt merge. Mason (talk) 21:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Lady Sovereign (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unneeded level of categorization per WP:OCEPON; the two subcategories are interlinked providing sufficient navigation. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:TOBE (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: With an article and a template, this doesn't qualify for C2F but this is a completely unnecessary category for the existing content. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – it shouldn't have the template anyway, per WP:CAT#T, so this is definitely WP:OCEPON. jlwoodwa (talk) 16:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Yachtracing-stub

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Template:Yachtracing-stub

Category:UCLA Department of German faculty

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:09, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:UCLA Department of German faculty to Category:University of California, Los Angeles faculty

Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question/alternative: Is there a way to populate it? The merge target is extremely crowded, and diffusing by department/disciple is helpful. If not able to populate, I think we should repurpose the category to align with the European Languages and Transcultural Studies Faculty that does exist at UCLA [7]. Mason (talk) 18:22, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, without objection to recreate the category when more articles are available. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:41, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Transportation in the Californias

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Transportation in the Californias to Category:The Californias

Nominator's rationale: Only one page in this underpopulated category. I don't think this is helpful for navigation at the moment. Mason (talk) 14:56, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Carcharocles to Category:Otodus

Nominator's rationale: Otodus is the current accepted name, so it only makes sense to have the category at the correct location. NotAGenious (talk) 13:44, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename, article has been moved 3 years ago so this could have been listed at speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Veterans of the Stonewall riots

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Veterans of the Stonewall riots to Category:Participants in the Stonewall riots

Nominator's rationale: rename, the term "veterans" is quite specific but does not appear in the articles. "Participants" seems more neutral. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with renaming, on a side note this category appears to contain only one side when both sides are veterans/participants... I will be remedying that oversight by including relevant law enforcement veterans/participants. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 14:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with renaming and broadening the category's scope. Mason (talk) 18:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kingdom of Albania

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:13th century in the Kingdom of Albania to Category:Kingdom of Albania (medieval)
Propose merging Category:14th century in the Kingdom of Albania to Category:Kingdom of Albania (medieval)

Nominator's rationale: merge, there are only two subcategories and very little content in each. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Chairmen of Trade associations of the Netherlands

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Chairmen of Trade associations of the Netherlands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unclear what the purpose of this category is, most of the articles it has been added to are about politicians. It is the only category of this name for any country. Unhelpful for navigation as not within a specific category tree. AusLondonder (talk) 07:20, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not a defining characteristic of these articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:Critics of veganism

Category:Olympic Games swimming controversies

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:29, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:Olympic Games swimming controversies to Category:Olympic Games controversies and Category:Swimming controversies

Nominator's rationale: I think we should purge and selectively merge this category because olympic swimming controversies are vague, and we don't really have enough content in Swimming controversies that are non-olympic to justify diffusing Mason (talk) 12:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, it is a viable subcategory of Category:Olympic Games controversies. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:21, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:32, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is that most of the pages in Olympic Games swimming controversies aren't really about specific controversies. Mason (talk) 18:39, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is a fair point. But then the category should be deleted rather than merged. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison: Thoughts on deletion? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:01, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with deletion. I'll check to see if there are any that should be added back to the parents. Mason (talk) 23:34, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added Lochtegate to both parents now. Mason (talk) 23:36, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Game jam video games

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

The result of the discussion was: no consensus. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:00, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Game jam video games (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Having been initially created as part of a game jam is not defining for these games. While it can be an interesting factoid that shows how game jams help inspire developers, my guess is that most players of Celeste, Inscryption, etc. don't know or care that it originated in a game jam, and it certainly isn't mentioned prominently in the gaming media. That makes this category fail WP:NONDEF. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Just because some players may not know the game originated from a game jam doesn't invalidate that there is recognization of what game jams produce in the industry as a whole, so this is a defining category. Also, "not mentioned prominently in gaming media" can be disproven with sources, [8], [9], [10] etc. --Masem (t) 03:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't read the first two sources but the third is surely irrelevant for this discussion. It proves notability of the topic, but it does not prove that it is defining for e.g. Amnesia Fortnight 2012. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What I meant is that it is not typically mentioned when the gaming press talks about a particular game. Of course, game jams are notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it's needed to show how games created through game jams are recognized post release as such games, it becomes a matter of picking examples, and this will depend on the impact of the game and relationship to coverage.
A well known game is Inscryption and those sources are plenty eg [11], [12], [13]. Or Goat Simulator, [14], [15], [16].
The idea is comparable to how a projects originates such as in Category:Crowdfunded video games and even to a degree of Category:Indie games (though here this has no question of being defining). The implication that players may not care about these is short sighted since these are a significant vector of new games into the industry and the industry recognizes the importance of game jams. — Masem (t) 19:17, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:50, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Grand Theft Auto mods

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:10, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:Grand Theft Auto mods to Category:Grand Theft Auto and Category:Video game mods

Nominator's rationale: Out all 4 of pages in this category, only 2 of these are individual mods: Multi Theft Auto and FiveM (FiveM is a redirect by the way). "Hot Coffee" is just a name for a minigame, it isn't its own mod and Grand Theft Auto modding is just for the modding in general. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:45, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lean keep. Smallcat is no longer a policy. Four seems like enough to keep a category. And Hot Coffee requires a mod to access. Mason (talk) 02:20, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hot Coffee 'requiring a mod to access' does not make Hot Coffee itself qualify as a mod. Grand Theft Auto modding is about the modding in general, rather than one specific mod. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 00:36, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge I agree that it simply isn't necessary at this time due to small size, though I disagree Hot Coffee is not a mod. Reliable sources all refer to it as a mod due to the enabling being via a mod and Wikipedia cannot just go with what someone decides it isn't. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:04, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Centuries in Landskrona‎

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Centuries in Landskrona‎

Women local politicans

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Women local politicans

October 4

Category:Lostwave

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:Lostwave

Category:Memoirs by American prison officers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:American memoirs and Category:Memoirs by prison officers. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Memoirs by American prison officers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization. The category has two entries which could easily be upcat to Category:American memoirs and Category:Memoirs by prison officers Vegantics (talk) 21:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:18, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dual merge per nom/Marco Mason (talk) 21:20, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:Riize

Category:Spacecraft endings

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Spacecraft endings to Category:Spacecraft retirement

Nominator's rationale: There does not appear to be such a thing as a "spacecraft ending". I suggest renaming to correspond with spacecraft retirement, which can be the main article of the category. I do realize that will necessitate the removal of various subcategories, but as-is, it is too vague overall and does not correspond with any actual terms. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:NCT Wish albums

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:NCT Wish albums

Category:Actors who are Wheelchair Users

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Actors with disabilities and Category:Wheelchair users. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:55, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Actors who are Wheelchair Users to Category:Actors who are wheelchair users

Nominator's rationale: Capitalization. Fram (talk) 11:26, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was after talking to two actors who are wheelchair users. Like Blind or Deaf actors, chair users have their own identity, and they have particular access needs which makes accessing the profession of acting particularly problematic. They seemed to be a category missing from Actors with Disabilities... which is a title that is questionable. I know quite a lot of Disabled Actors and although they are actors first, being a Disabled Actors has two useful interpretations. From a cultural standpoint they are a community, which is why when the Disabled Artists Alliance was formed, over 300 disabled actors and theatre creatives who lobby against cripping-up in the UK, they chose the name, because from a social model of disability perspective they are also disabled by the ableist attitudes and assumptions when it comes to casting. GRF (talk) 11:47, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this really a defining intersection? There are no other occupation categories in Category:Wheelchair users other than sports which is something different. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:04, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's an interesting point, but when you consider visibility of disability in dramatisation, people see the chair. There is an an actor with cerebral palsy who ambulant wheelchair user called Zak Ford-Williams. He has appeared on stage not in his chair, but as he can only stand for a limited amount of time, and his movements are so exhausting, his time on stage is all he can manage on the day because of a combination of pain and fatigue. He creates an illusion of not being disabled by pushing what he is capable of. He always takes a bow from his chair at the end of the performance and talks about the reaction of the audiences who make assumptions about him, and about this being a political act and post modernist in itself, and a wheelchair is a symbol of that. It is as important as any other portrayal of visible disability, and we have categories for other disabled actors, why not wheelchair users? GRF (talk) 17:24, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ Merge per Pppery. If kept, rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Pppery to Actors with disabilities and Wheelchair users. Technically, using a wheelchair is not a disability (so egrs doesn't need to apply), so the comparison to being blind or deaf doesn't work amazingly. And even if it did count, the argument posed by Garethfw is for keeping disabled actors. Mason (talk) 23:28, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is this about a social, cultural, medical or political perspectives. If it is about diagnosis, how do we confirm hidden disability actors with for example dyslexia have a diagnosis, or self-diagnosed, self-diagnosed or "identify as..." which is not strictly medical, it is cultural. Then how do we deal with deaf, Deaf or hearing impaired actors? Here we have medical, cultural and political models.

I have dyslexia and ADHD (you have to trust me and I have a full diagnosis from two psychologists nd a psychiatrist, or so I say...), but if I was an actor the audience would not know I was disabled and if I declared I was there is no evidence apart from self-identity, which cannot be verified. So having a visible disability, or having the aspects of a condition being visible so the audience label me as "disabled" such as having one arm, that is both political, cultural and to a degree medical, although they are seeing a trait without knowing the condition. Which is where wheelchair users come in, although they have different conditions they can experience common barriers both in social attitudes as well as physical ones, and as such they are a community and have an identity, so this is social model of disability, and political model, regardless of medical.

I'm really confused because it is confusing as the categories do not seem to align with any particular model of disability. GRF (talk) 18:19, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am not seeing opposition to renaming if kept, but should this category be merged/deleted? If so, should we merge or just delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:13, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge This is not a defining intersection at all. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dual merge per Pppery and Mason. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:33, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Video games about aircraft

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. {{Trout}} QuantumFoam66 for multi-!voting (it just makes it hard to read as a closer) and for moving the category without going through CFD. With that out of the way, there is consensus that Category:Video games about aircraft should be kept and no consensus with no prejudice against speedy renomination regarding the category redirect Category:Aviation video games. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Video games about aircraft to Category:Aviation video games

Nominator's rationale: These are overlapping categories. THe merge target is older and was merged into this one outside of the cfd process. Mason (talk) 00:24, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment These cannot be overlapping categories as Category:Aviation video games currently does not contain any content. I also believe you are saying I should have renamed Category:Aviation video games rather than creating a new category. Though these two categories are technically different, as the name and subcategories have or had a different structure, also Category:Helicopter video games wasn't a part of Category:Aviation video games before I redirected the category. Furthermore the category Category:Video games about aircraft is very small, just saying. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:22, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You removed all the content from the Aviation category. All of the excuses/explanations you've listed does not justify circumventing the CFD process. Mason (talk) 16:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, the original category of Category:Aviation video games was always too small, overly-vague, and conflicted with Category:Flight simulation video games. It is a better idea to instead just delete both Category:Aviation video games and Category:Video games about aircraft.

QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. The right process is to request a rename at this forum. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:22, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The current name of category actually works better, especially because it is a child category of Category:Video games about vehicles. When the page Category:Video games about aircraft is deleted and merged, we will have to rename the category to the original name I desired. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 04:12, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is irrelevant that the current name works better. You should have proposed a rename instead of recreating a category. Mason (talk) 16:43, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was actually going to say that first because I changed my mind. We're doing any of that. We'll just merge it instead and leave it as is. The category is very small though. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 17:09, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why would you think that the size of the category is relevant? It doesn't matter about the size. The problem is that you're circumventing the process. Mason (talk) 19:46, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not all flight simulation games are about aircraft. Apparently some people don't realize that things that can fly, but are not aircraft also feature in games, such as dragon riding, bird riding, and other manner of fantastical creatures. Therefore, games about aircraft and flight simulators should be separate categories. Rather, delete Category:Aviation video games as overly vague. I am also concerned about the tree of Category:Works about aviation and whether that is vague and overlapping. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:34, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have an issue with converting "aviation" to "aircraft". The discussion is mainly about proper procedure. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This CfD process has been a disaster. Finding a non-vehicle based-simulator under Category:Flight simulation video games category is like finding a needle in a haystack, Category:Video games about aircraft will end up being a largely-overlapping category with Category:Flight simulation video games. So it is a better idea to just delete both Category:Aviation video games and Category:Video games about aircraft.

QuantumFoam66 (talk) 23:17, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stop double voting. The issue is that you circumvented the CFD process and are now suggesting delete because you don't like the verdict. Mason (talk) 04:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I just added Airplane Mode (video game) which would appear to be your supposed "needle in a haystack" given that it's about aircraft but has nothing to do with piloting them. This only further proves my point. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zxcvbnm Are you opposing combining the categories, opposing the name, or endorsing circumvention of procedures? I'm fine with a merge and rename to the original. The issue is that there are two categories, and the Aviation video games category is much older, so it's edit history should be preserved. Mason (talk) 03:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One is not much older than the other, both were created in the last 2 years, so there is not really a need to preserve history eithe way. I support maintaining the current status quo, while deleting "aviation" to avoid confusion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Aviation video games, which I will note is currently a {{category redirect}}.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: People supporting a merge, do you support deleting Category:Aviation video games?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 18:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral on deletion. I think that should be a seperate Cfd from this one. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Chemical looping technologies

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 (and I take no pleasure in this result). Thank you all for your participation, in any event :) House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:57, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Chemical looping technologies to Category:Chemical process engineering

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There are one two pages in this category, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 12:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, though I am not sure if Category:Chemical process engineering or Category:Chemical processes is the right target. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:25, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't really sure either, so any content experts would be much appreciated! Mason (talk) 17:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will drop a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, with potential rename to expand scope slightly for inclusion of additional related articles. I've never heard the phrase "chemical looping", but I know that pressure swing adsorption, anthraquinone process, and several decaffeination processes are all a comparable concept. Maybe something with "cycle" rather than "loop" is better? These are all like a catalytic cycle, but where the cycle is interrupted by time and/or place instead of a one-pot type of process. Thanks for the WPCHEM ping, HouseBlaster! DMacks (talk) 06:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DMacks: so how exactly should this be renamed? And which other articles can be added after renaming? Marcocapelle (talk) 08:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, I'm not sure of the name. I'm in the chemistry world, not engineering, so I don't know if engineers have a more-general term here. In addition to the three articles I already mentioned, also sulfur–iodine cycle (and other thermochemical cycles) and Girdler sulfide process come to mind. DMacks (talk) 08:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you! It hadn't even occurred to me that this is about engineering rather than about chemistry. I left a notification at the WikiProject Engineering talk page. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  You're welcome! I looked up some likely synonym/descriptor phrases, and couldn' find anything else consistent. "Loop" in the context of reactor design seems to have several distinct modes (closed vs open; but a flow reactor might be a loop but not have discrete reaction zones; and component reactions might each be themselves a batch vs continuous). Hopefully some engineering folks can help figure out a reasonable term of art here. DMacks (talk) 17:33, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'll emphasize the message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Engineering. And thank you to DMacks for your help so far!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, both of these processes can be pointed towards a broad category of Category:Chemical processes, followed by Category:Chemical_reactions or buried deeper under Category:Combustion.

Reasoning for this, looking at both associated articles, they describe oxidizing reactions (one literally for combustion and the other for a process of reformation/gasification (which is creates gases like H2/N2/etc.)) The name (if applicable) could be renamed to something to the effect of oxidative looping, combustion looping, process looping, etc. Process is probably the most broad and applicable — ChemicalBear (talk) 01:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC) 01:01, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DMacks, Marcocapelle, and Smasongarrison: thoughts? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I realize that this has been relisted twice already, but I think this needs more thurough discussion and consensus seems very close. I will ping people again :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 18:33, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DMacks, Marcocapelle, and Smasongarrison: thoughts on the above? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 18:33, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I had the expertise. I'm fine with either a rename suggested by content experts or a merge. Mason (talk) 21:30, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I obviously object to ChemicalBear's rationale, since I found about a half-dozen other articles on this approximate genre (whatever it's called), as noted in my previous comments about adjusted scope, most of which are not about combustion or simple oxidation, and one that is not even a chemical process at all, but all that have a coherent topic of the cycling process. DMacks (talk) 08:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 Como, North Carolina

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:56, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People from Como, North Carolina to Category:People from Hertford County, North Carolina

Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 17:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge for Now Como, North Carolina says 91 people live there, but not objection to recreation if enough content appears later, per WP:MFN. - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:British patrolwomen

Category:Solent_University (and sub-categories)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:Solent_University (and sub-categories)

Category:Computer science award winners

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:57, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Computer science award winners to Category:Computer scientists by award

Nominator's rationale: These two categories currently have almost the same content and ideally should have exactly the same content. I couldn't find any existing documentation about which one is preferred, so I'm proposing merging one way but we could merge the other way too. Shardul.chiplunkar (talk) 14:29, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or reverse merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Clearly duplicative, makes it cleareer that's it's a container cat, and matches Category:Writers by award. - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Members of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:Members of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre

Category:Polish expatriates in the Czech lands

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:People from the Kingdom of Bohemia and Category:Polish expatriates. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:01, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Polish expatriates in the Czech lands to Category:Polish expatriates

Nominator's rationale: merge, if kept it should become Category:Polish expatriates to Bohemia, Czech lands is an anachronistic term. But there is no expatriates to Bohemia tree, so better to upmerge. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle Why did you empty sibling Category:Danish expatriates in the Czech lands out of process? There is a Category:History of the Czech lands and a main article Czech lands. You may not personally like the term, but it is well-established in historiography, as it would be an actual anachronism to use "Czech Republic" to refer collectively to Bohemia, Moravia and Czech Silesia before 1993. I think you'll need a better justification to upmerge this category and to ECOOP its sibling than that you perceive Czech lands to be an anachronism. Alternatively, all 4 people might fit into Category:People from the Kingdom of Bohemia, as they all appear to have lived in Prague between 1198 and 1918, so that might be a fine alt merge? NLeeuw (talk) 04:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nederlandse Leeuw: I suppose you mean Category:People from the Kingdom of Bohemia as a second merge target next to Category:Polish expatriates? That would be alright. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With respect to the Danish sibling, there was one article in it and I removed it because of the content of the article. That had nothing to do with "Czech lands", otherwise I would simply have added the category to this nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, I could agree to a dual merge to Category:People from the Kingdom of Bohemia and Category:Polish expatriates. That would be per WP:MFN because Category:Polish expatriates in the Czech lands is currently somewhat underpopulated with just 3 members, not because there is something wrong with the term Czech lands.

Princess Louise of Denmark (1875–1906) was born in Copenhagen and moved to Ratibořice Castle in the Kingdom of Bohemia, where she lived from 1896 to 1906. How does that have nothing to do with "Czech lands"? Either way, in this situation, the category should have been nominated for deletion/merger or something, not emptied out of process without stating a reason.

Nevertheless, we could probably agree on a dual merge here as well: to Category:People from the Kingdom of Bohemia and ~~Category:Danish expatriates (or~~ Category:Danish emigrants as you already did). NLeeuw (talk) 15:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Princess Louise belongs in an emigrant category, not in an expatriate category. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Dual merge in both cases then? NLeeuw (talk) 20:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Response to NL's latest suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 12:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a dual merge to Category:People from the Kingdom of Bohemia and Category:Polish expatriates is alright. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Bordeaux tramway stops

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:02, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Bordeaux tramway stops to Category:Tram stops in Bordeaux

Nominator's rationale: I'm not familiar with public transportation in France but it looks like these categories are duplicates of each other. Since this category is the only category in Category:Tram stops in France by system, it seems wiser to merge this category rather than doing a merge in the opposite direction. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Instead, all subcategories under Category:Tram stops in France by commune should be deleted. All these tram stops are part of the network of Bordeaux tramway. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:21, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: Are you supporting this nomination as a first step, or do you oppose dealing with only one category? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 17:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This category that is now nominated is the only one that should be kept. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 19:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I created this distinction, I can answer the question on the rationale. Category:Bordeaux tramway stops is a category for all the tram stops on the Bordeaux tram system, whilst Category:Tram stops in Bordeaux is a category for all tram stops in the commune of Bordeaux. As the tram system extends beyond the commune, they are not duplicates, but as the Bordeaux tram system is the only current tram system in the commune, Category:Tram stops in Bordeaux is going to be a subset of Category:Bordeaux tramway stops, unless we have articles on historic tram stops, which doesn't seem to be the case. I'm not greatly wedded to the idea of multiple categories; I created it this way because I had previously been criticised for putting stops that were not in the city of Zurich in a 'Tram stops in Zurich' category and been pressured into this two category approach there. If the community has swung against that approach, I'm happy to go with that. I also note that, as Marcocapelle points out, all the sub-categories of Category:Tram stops in France by commune are now in the Bordeaux agglomeration (I'm pretty sure that was not the case back then), so there is merit in his suggestion to merge both categories into Category:Bordeaux tramway stops, and then delete Category:Tram stops in France by commune and all its sub-categories. That would of course break the link between commune and tram stop, but maybe that is not worth keeping. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 16:13, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I have added text to both categories explaining their content, which will be useful whatever is kept. Mea culpa, I should have done this when I made the distinction. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 16:30, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on chris_j_wood's comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 12:40, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:Graph algorithms

Category:Fictional terrestrial planets

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:02, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Fictional terrestrial planets to Category:Fictional planets

Nominator's rationale: Whether a planet is made of rock is rarely ever defining to a fictional work, as compared to a real-life planet, and is typically the default for notable fictional planets. They could be made of glass, steel or unobtainium and it would essentially make no difference. Therefore this category is fairly unnecessary and should be merged. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:10, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Composition is sometimes plot-relevant, but not always. Only remaining fictional-planets-by-type category, and likely to include most fictional planets because giant planets are not interesting. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Provisional governments in Indonesia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:02, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Provisional governments in Indonesia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Name of category does not match the (only) subcategory. Also, there has only been one provisional government n Indonesia, so this category is unnecessary Davidelit (Talk) 03:22, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, every country was own Provisional governments, that for every user detect how the sentral of goverment controled as centralized system. Putu Suhartawan (talk) 03:27, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete accompanied by unrelenting creation of red link categories in the Indonesian project shows a lack of clarity as to english meanings, and already existing categories and subject. Strongly suggest there is inadequate demonstration as to any understanding WP:ABOUT and WP:NOT JarrahTree 04:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Futhermore - since nomination editing and adding to the category show a very limited understanding what the meaning in english actually is in the context that the nominator has stated above.JarrahTree 04:11, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, now I see it. "Provisional" instead of "provincial." -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 05:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the three articles are entirely unrelated. One is about before the Provisional Constitution of 1950, one article is about an institution based on that constitution and one article is about East Timor. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:49, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:LGBTQ Wikipedians. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 02:08, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:LGBT Wikipedians to Category:LGBTQ Wikipedians

Nominator's rationale: The parent article has been renamed to LGBTQ (RM discussion) last month and the related WikiProject has now also been renamed to WP:LGBTQ (RM discussion of the community) after another discussion, so following WP:CONSUB and WP:C2D, I propose the user category also follows suit, aligning with the sentiment of the WikiProject that the community has embraced LGBTQ . Raladic (talk) 03:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename, I can't see any reason why this category would have a different sort of name than established in mainspace. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:52, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:12, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy rename This is really WP:C2D material and didn't need discussion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
People have been objecting to C2D renames (even though it clearly applies) – see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 11#LGBT nominations which were opposed at CFDS. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 15:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 15:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:11th-century Somali people

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:11th-century Somali people

Category:SpaceX astronauts

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:SpaceX astronauts

Category:Toxic enzymes

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. No consensus on whether to merge or delete, so we are going with the original suggestion. Categorization of Cholera toxin can be discussed at Talk:Cholera toxin. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:11, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Toxic enzymes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category isn't very helpful with only one page in it. Mason (talk) 20:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's also not meaningfully different from Category:Protein toxins and can be merged/redirected into that. ― Synpath 11:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Related: while updating Category:Protein toxins with Botulinum toxin I found Category:Biological toxin weapons - a bizarrely named, small category with mostly protein toxins within it. I removed the small molecule toxins from it and think it should be merged to Category:Protein toxins. ― Synpath 12:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should we merged?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Typo in my last relist comment. I meant to ask "Should we merge?"
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My knowledge of molecular biology is very limited, but considering that Category:Enzymes is part of the tree of Category:Proteins it sounds reasonable to merge and possibly redirect the nominated category to Category:Protein toxins. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:58, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Toxicity is species-dependent, and different variants of the same enzyme can have measurably different properties. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:09, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Indonesian bureaucrat (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Absurdly general (and ungrammatical) category, potentially encompassing 10 percent of the population Davidelit (Talk) 00:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete 280 million people - not practical to even consider potential issues, the existential issues arising from a singular designation is not what wikipedia is about JarrahTree 00:49, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, we need the real data about how the bureaucrat doing coruption culture for being normal, the realiable source is the best think for learning how the coruption growth. Putu Suhartawan (talk) 01:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - wikipedia categories are for an on line encyclopedia, not a WP:SOAPBOX. A closer examination of existing categories, and a more clearer understanding what WP:ABOUT might mean, the new categories being created are superfluous, and not help for what an average reader might learn about Indonesian politics or culture; the clarification of what already exists in the Indonesian project might help. JarrahTree 04:18, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, there is no meaningful distinction with Category:Government of Indonesia. The two subcategories are already in that tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The contents here included Category:Mayors of places in Indonesia (except that mayors are politicians, not bureaucrats) and one person who was already in the Category:Indonesian civil servants subcategory and thus represented duplicate categorization — so the only thing that wasn't a total misfile is the civil servants category, and the only thing left after cleanup is the civil servants category. But no other country's civil servants category either has or needs a "bureaucrats" parent for it, because civil servants is a synonym of bureaucrats, not a subcategory of it. Bearcat (talk) 14:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Tourist attractions in Salem

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Category:Tourist attractions in Salem

Category:The 100 most prominent Serbs according to a committee of academicians at the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:05, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:The 100 most prominent Serbs according to a committee of academicians at the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is an overcategorisation that duplicates an existing list (The 100 most prominent Serbs) and is an example of an essentially arbritrary WP:TOPTEN, and is not a defining characteristic of the included persons. We definitely do not need both a list and a category here. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:10, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:11, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:12, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

October 3

Category:Cult leaders

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:46, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Cult leaders (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category was deleted previously, but G4 speedy deletion was declined due to the age of the previous discussion. That's understandable, but the reasons for the previous deletion are still relevant: This kind of category is a magnet for POV pushing and BLP issues. In spot-checking I found multiple cases where the category was applied to articles where the term "cult" did not appear anywhere in the article text, and at least one BLP where the related content was a brief mention of the subject denying an allegation of cultism. Even when use of the label is documentable from reliable sources, it is often contentious. Categories don't have the nuance to handle this designation well, so they should not be used for it, just as we have decided not to use biographical categories for some other contentious labels. RL0919 (talk) 23:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, we already have Category:Founders of new religious movements which sounds quite a bit more neutral. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:14, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, Marco and WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. NLeeuw (talk) 19:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Over the Hedge video games

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 11#Category:Over the Hedge video games

Category:Brazilian exporters

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Brazilian exporters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The only category for exporters by country, does not appear to necessarily be accurate for sole subject in the category who operated a port. Unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 18:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:21, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Films directed by Nancy Walker

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Films directed by Nancy Walker (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: There has only ever been one item in this category, so the category seems to lack a reason for existing. No additional information is gained from this categorization that is not already in the sole article within it. The director died 32 years ago, so there will never be another film to be added to this category. Nicholas0 (talk) 17:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. As far as I know there is no agreement on keeping this sort of categories regardless size. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:13, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. DonIago (talk) 03:33, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Comedy directors

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 11#Comedy directors

Category:American comedy actors

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:American comedy actors (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: As per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 4#Comedy actors, this is a WP:PERFCAT violation; actors shouldn't be categorized by the genre(s) in which they've appeared. DonIago (talk) 13:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for consistency with the previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:13, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Companies disestablished in 1788 by country

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Companies disestablished in 1788 by country (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Empty (and parent cat has only one entry) — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 11:00, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, no need to bring empty categories to CFD, GhostInTheMachine. Unless they have been emptied out of process, you can just tag them CSD C1. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:10, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:British companies disestablished in 1788

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:British companies disestablished in 1788 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: empty with little chance of use — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 10:59, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - it was in use until emptied by the nominator: Special:Diff/1249134536. However Category:Companies disestablished in 1788 only has 1 article altogther so diffusing by country is excessive. Perspicax (talk) 15:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Perspicax. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yes, GhostInTheMachine, in the future, you can just tag an empty category CSD C1, it doesn't require a week-long discussion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Electorate of Württemberg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:People from the Electorate of Württemberg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:People from the Electorate of Baden (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, the Electorate of Württemberg lasted only three years and none of the articles are specifically about the electorate except the eponymous article. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I agree, this is too much for so little content. Fits better within wider Category:History of Württemberg, where it already is. NLeeuw (talk) 17:10, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nederlandse Leeuw: I added Category:People from the Electorate of Baden to the nomination, which covers exactly the same period. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good. I affirm my !vote to Delete all three nominees. NLeeuw (talk) 08:56, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Music in Landskrona

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Music in Landskrona to Category:Culture in Landskrona and Category:Music in the Øresund Region

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Vietnamese jazz (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The subcategory in here is for jazz musicians who are Vietnamese, not musicians who play Vietnamese jazz (is there even such a thing?). Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 06:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom, and it is a redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:28, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Summer camps in fiction

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 11#Summer camps in fiction

Category:Films directed by Caroline Labrèche

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Films directed by Caroline Labrèche (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Films directed by Steeve Léonard (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Two related categories for co-directors of the same film. Per longstanding consensus, a filmmaker has to have a biographical article about the person before they get a "Films directed by" category to batch their films together -- but neither of these two people have a biographical article at all, so these aren't both necessary for the same single film. Bearcat (talk) 00:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, it might have been different if there were e.g. five articles in this category, but then at the same time it would have been more likely there was an article about Caroline Labrèche and Steeve Léonard too. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:58, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

October 2

Years in Shigatse

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#Years in Shigatse

Category:Middle Eastern-Jewish culture in the United States

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Middle Eastern-Jewish culture in the United States to Category:Mizrahi Jewish culture in the United States
Propose merging Category:American people of Middle Eastern-Jewish descent to Category:American Mizrahi Jews

Nominator's rationale: The categories overlap significantly. Sakakami (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or reverse merge, Mizrahi Jews are Jews of West Asian and North African descent. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 17:06, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - LTA sock removing "Middle Eastern"/moving "Middle Eastern" to "West Asia". ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 17:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Molothrus to Category:Cowbirds

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate topic UtherSRG (talk) 21:03, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge – I don't think a genus's scientific and common names have different meanings as categories. jlwoodwa (talk) 21:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, possibly redirect, for consistency with article space where Molothrus redirects to Cowbird. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 with chronic fatigue syndrome

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:People with Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome. I will create a redirect from Category:People with ME/CFS to Category:People with Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:13, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:People with chronic fatigue syndrome to Category:People with ME/CFS

Nominator's rationale: To match the renaming of the main article from "Chronic fatigue syndrome" to "Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome"; and using ME/CFS so as not to be too long. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 19:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The category should obviously be renamed somehow, either unabbreviated or abbreviated. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:47, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to the longer title for consistency with the article (WP:C2D), but create a redirect from the short title to avoid hand fatigue. jlwoodwa (talk) 21:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename but with the longer name to match the parent article. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:17, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename I am for the rename as commonly known as both ME and CFS. 2A00:23C6:CE0F:6D01:5040:7270:BE46:64E9 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Neighborhoods in Mbarara

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Neighborhoods in Uganda and Category:Mbarara. Categorization of Makenke can be discussed at Talk:Makenke. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Neighborhoods in Mbarara to Category:Mbarara

Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation with a single article, better categorised within the larger category. AusLondonder (talk) 19:10, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge, also to Category:Neighborhoods in Uganda. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AusLondonder: Are you okay with a dual merge? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure it's necessary as most of the Category:Neighbourhoods by country categories are container categories for neighbourhoods by specific city or region, but I'm not strongly opposed. AusLondonder (talk) 01:22, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Films directed by Francis Annan

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Films directed by Francis Annan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Per longstanding consensus, a filmmaker has to have a biographical article about the person before he gets a "Films directed by" category to batch his films together. Unlike Bob Carlson below, however, that rule wasn't followed here: Francis Annan's lack of a biographical article isn't because it got deleted, it's because no biographical article ever existed in the first place. So without a biographical article about Francis Annan to parent this, we don't need it for just one film. Bearcat (talk) 17:51, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, it might have been different if there were e.g. five articles in this category, but then at the same time it would have been more likely there was an article about Francis Annan too. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:52, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Films directed by Bob Carlson

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Films directed by Bob Carlson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Per longstanding consensus, a filmmaker has to have a biographical article about the person before he gets a "Films directed by" category to batch his films together. While that rule was followed here, in that Bob Carlson did have an article at the time this was created, it subsequently got prodded for being improperly sourced and has never been recreated since -- so if he doesn't currently have a biographical article to parent this category, then we don't need to retain the category for just one film. Bearcat (talk) 17:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, it might have been different if there were e.g. five articles in this category, but then at the same time it would have been more likely there was an article about Bob Carlson too. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Recipient of the Duke of Gloucester's Cup

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Recipient of the Duke of Gloucester's Cup to Category:Recipients of the Duke of Gloucester's Cup

Nominator's rationale: C2A, plural "recipients". Wikishovel (talk) 17:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:56, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:OCAWARD. Gjs238 (talk) 14:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The three articles I clicked on (HMAS Brisbane (D 41), No. 11 Squadron RAAF, & 6th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment), didn't even mention the award so it's clearly not defining, per WP:OCAWARD. - RevelationDirect (talk) 17:54, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 the Jats and Category:Buildings and structures of the Jats

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Battles involving the Jats (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and Category:Buildings and structures of the Jats (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: We do not categorize battles and structures by caste and have deleted Indian princely states (kingdoms) which were categorized as such as well (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 4#Caste based princely state categories). A deletion here should naturally follow. Gotitbro (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:58, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Technology CEO Council

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Technology CEO Council (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Another category for an organisation which does not even have its own page. Category contains people associated with the organisation, but is again not even mentioned on all of the subjects within the category. AusLondonder (talk) 04:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:36, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Technology Council of Australia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Technology Council of Australia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category for an organisation which does not even have its own page. Category contains people associated with the organisation, but is not even mentioned on all of the subjects within the category. AusLondonder (talk) 04:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

agree Ivan191navi (talk) 07:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Financial regulatory authorities of Anguilla

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Financial regulatory authorities and Category:Regulation in Anguilla. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:41, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Financial regulatory authorities of Anguilla to Category:Regulation in Anguilla

Nominator's rationale: Category for regulatory authorities which contains just one authority and is unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 04:16, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unhelpful for navigation? are you stupid ? Ivan191navi (talk) 07:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge, also to Category:Financial regulatory authorities. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AusLondonder: Are you alright with a dual merge? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, support that proposal. AusLondonder (talk) 01:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Defense engine manufacturers by country

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Defense engine manufacturers by country to Category:Engine manufacturers
Propose merging Category:Defense engine manufacturers of Ukraine to Category:Engine manufacturers of Ukraine
Propose merging Category:Defense engine manufacturers of the United States to Category:Engine manufacturers of the United States

Nominator's rationale: Contains two country sub-categories, the companies within those categories do not appear to exclusively "defense engine manufactures". Title of the category doesn't really make sense. AusLondonder (talk) 03:54, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

doesn't really make sense... so wikipedia also does not make sense. you are stupid Ivan191navi (talk) 07:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that great contribution there, Ivan191navi. AusLondonder (talk) 17:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:42, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Cyclists from Harbin

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Cyclists from Harbin to Category:Cyclists from Heilongjiang

Nominator's rationale: Also merge with Category:Sportspeople from Harbin. Category only contains 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 02:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge per nom, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Police raids to LGBTQ venues

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Police raids to LGBTQ venues to Category:Law enforcement operations against LGBTQ venues

Nominator's rationale: Wrong preposition, does not match Category:Law enforcement operations. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 17:08, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Police raids on Islamists

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Police raids on Islamists to Category:Law enforcement operations against Islamist groups

Nominator's rationale: Wrong preposition, title does not match parent category. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 17:08, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

October 1

Category:Bohorodchany

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Bohorodchany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary category since it contains only one article beyond the main article. (Arguably, though, we could add Bohorodchany Raion.) Pichpich (talk) 23:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as this is apparently about the rural settlement, the county article does not even belong in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per above. Gjs238 (talk) 14:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 police activities in Australia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:2024 police activities in Australia to Category:2024 in Australia

Nominator's rationale: I propose an upmerge to Category:2024 in Australia. It's not clear what a "police activity" is although judging by the contents it's "whatever required the intervention of police (or overseeing by police) at some point". I don't really see this as defining and the three articles in the category currently are only very very loosely related. Note that, to my knowledge, there is no existing comparable category. Pichpich (talk) 23:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Wikishovel (talk) 17:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Ariel (settlement)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Ariel (settlement) to Category:Ariel (Israeli settlement)

Nominator's rationale: To match it's main article, which is Ariel (Israeli settlement) nableezy - 21:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, this could have been listed at speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:53, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Vancouver sports championships

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Vancouver sports championships (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEF User:Namiba 20:22, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, trivial intersection between geographical entity and sports accomplishment. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:States with limited recognition

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

The result of the discussion was: add Cyprus. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose establishing inclusion criteria for Category:States with limited recognition

Nominator's rationale: The current membership of this category seems somewhat WP:ARBITRARYCAT when compared to the contents of main article List of states with limited recognition. That list is great at explaining all the fine legal nuances, in a way that a category like this will always struggle to do. There appears to be a consensus that this category should exist, see also precedent Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 February 23#Category:States with limited recognition. But participants in that discussion appear not to have agreed which articles should be in or out. Notably, Cyprus is in the list, but not the category; otherwise they seem to coincide (unless I'm missing something).

I'm bringing this up because I just created Category:Lists of wars by state with limited recognition involved as a subcategory of both Category:States with limited recognition and Category:Lists of wars by country involved, because I didn't think Abkhazia, Kosovo, Republika Srpska, SADR, Somaliland, South Ossetia and Taiwan should be considered "countries" under international law. But then I had my doubts about North Korea and South Korea (only not recognised by each other), Israel and State of Palestine (both recognised by the vast majority of UN member states, but missing several dozens of recognitions), and the PRC.

Perhaps adding Cyprus to the category will already solve this issue? But I'd like to confirm with you first here. Especially calling the Koreas' recognition "limited" just because they don't recognise each other, and calling Cyprus' recognition "limited" just because Turkey doesn't recognise Cyprus (only Northern Cyprus, as the only UN state), seems a bit of a stretch of the word "limited". I mean, you really could do worse than 192 out of 193. But if we agree on that definition, then I'll apply that to the subcategory on wars they were involved in. We might also discuss whether we consider Republika Srpska as either a "country" or "state with limited recognition", as it appears not to have claimed independence since the Dayton Agreement of 1995 (making it a non-sovereign entity within Bosnia and Herzegovina); it's not in the List of states with limited recognition either. Finally, I did include List of wars involving the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria, but with the understanding that the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria no longer exists (it's in Category:Wikipedia categories named after former unrecognized states). Thoughts? NLeeuw (talk) 20:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should we have a category at all? A list is able to show the complexities of the topic much better than a category. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
participants in that discussion appear not to have agreed which articles should be in or out actually, there was a RfC about it not long ago and the consensus was that all the listed states belong in that list. M.Bitton (talk) 22:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, that's helpful information. You seem to mean Talk:List of states with limited recognition/Archive 15#Rfc on removing Armenia, China, Cyprus, Israel, Palestine, and North Korea from this article (April to June 2024), which had an overwhelming majority for keeping it as it was. I also see you already added Armenia, Cyprus, Israel, and China to Category:Lists of wars by state with limited recognition involved. So I suppose you would also support adding Cyprus to Category:States with limited recognition? I think we are going to come to a consensus quickly here.
- Lastly, what about List of wars involving Republika Srpska? It's WP:UNSOURCED and barely a "list" (3 items), so I don't know if it has a future. But presuming it does, should we perhaps treat it in a similar way as List of wars involving the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria? It's currently in the tree Category:Republika Srpska > Category:Political divisions of Bosnia and Herzegovina > Category:First-level administrative divisions by country, so we do not regard it as a sovereign country since 1995. But perhaps we could regard it as a state with limited recognition before 1995 that gave up its claim to independence in 1995? Just like Ichkeria, we could then put it in Category:Lists of wars by former country involved (as an unrecognised former "country") and Category:Lists of wars by state with limited recognition involved (as an unrecognised former "country"). I think that would be the best pragmatic solution that is technically correct.
NLeeuw (talk) 08:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I just WP:BOLDly added Cyprus. It seems that we all agree. I'll leave the question open for a little while longer in case anyone disagrees or has something interesting to add. NLeeuw (talk) 17:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:Louisville Black Caps

Category:Indian women translators

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:Indian women translators

Category:Urdu-language women writers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:Urdu-language women writers

Category:Military of Württemberg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Military of Württemberg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. There is no need to merge, the subcategory is already part of Category:History of Württemberg too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 17:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:History of the Timurid Empire

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:History of the Timurid Empire to Category:Timurid Empire

Nominator's rationale: merge, there is little content in this category and former countries do not need a history category per se. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:55, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 17:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Universities and colleges in Washington County, Rhode Island

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Universities and colleges in Washington County, Rhode Island to Category:Education in Washington County, Rhode Island

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. this category only has one university in it Mason (talk) 02:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Endemic fauna of Barbuda. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Animals of Barbuda to Category:Fauna of Barbuda

Nominator's rationale: Norm is Fauna. This could probably be speedied. BUt I also wanted to consider whether we need the category at all. Mason (talk) 01:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge more specifically to Category:Endemic fauna of Barbuda which apparently applies to both articles. It is Category:Fauna of Barbuda that we probably do not need. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent find! Mason (talk) 13:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Categories named after Canadian Premier League seasons

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

The result of the discussion was: rename as nominated. RedBlueGreen93 rebuts GiantSnowman's objection, and a majority supports renaming, resulting in clear consensus to do so. No prejudice against a C2D nomination if the articles are renamed. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:2019 Canadian Premier League to Category:2019 Canadian Premier League season
Propose renaming Category:2020 Canadian Premier League to Category:2020 Canadian Premier League season
Propose renaming Category:2021 Canadian Premier League to Category:2021 Canadian Premier League season
Propose renaming Category:2022 Canadian Premier League to Category:2022 Canadian Premier League season
Propose renaming Category:2023 Canadian Premier League to Category:2023 Canadian Premier League season
Propose renaming Category:2024 Canadian Premier League to Category:2024 Canadian Premier League season

Nominator's rationale: The names of these eponymous categories should match the title of their main articles. RedBlueGreen93 20:35, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. Giant Snowman 19:32, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - the category names are correct, it is the articles names which need changing, see 2024–25 Premier League and Category:2024–25 Premier League, as well as many others in Category:2024–25 domestic association football leagues, none of which use 'season'. Giant Snowman 19:36, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on GiantSnowman's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note - Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/League season, association football leagues articles that have multiple phases, such as postseason championships, are supposed to include the word season. Your examples of 2024–25 Premier League and Category:2024–25 Premier League only play a regular season, so their names are correct. This is not the case for the Canadian Premier League, Major League Soccer, Liga MX, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedBlueGreen93 (talk • contribs) 21:12, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename for Now per WP:C2D to match the main article names, like 2022 Canadian Premier League season. This discussion about the correct article names is in the wrong venue and deserves a WP:RM nomination where people familiar with football are more likely to participate. (If/when the articles are renamed through consensus, no objection to speedy renaming the categories again per WP:C2D.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 11:02, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Airlines of Turkmenistan and Category:Defunct airlines of Asia. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Defunct airlines of Turkmenistan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category containing only one article, List of defunct airlines of Turkmenistan, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 00:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Airlines of Turkmenistan , Defunct airlines of Asia, and Defunct companies of Turkmenistan @AusLondonder please consider plausible merge targets. The vast majority of your deletions have resulted in merges Mason (talk) 01:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't support a merge to the defunct companies category as it's just moving the problem from one category with a single article to another with a single article. I'll have a look at my XfD log but I'd be surprised if the vast majority of nominations have been merged. AusLondonder (talk) 01:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Airlines of Turkmenistan and Category:Defunct airlines of Asia, per above discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

September 30

Category:Labor disputes in Botswana

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Botswana (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only article in this category is University of Botswana Non-Academic Staff Union, which is already appropriately categorised, not a specific dispute. AusLondonder (talk) 22:39, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Mainichi Broadcasting System

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Mainichi Broadcasting System to Category:MBS Media Holdings

Nominator's rationale: Current name of holding company. VenezuelanSpongeBobFan2004 (talk) 19:03, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Airliner bombings in the United States

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:Airliner bombings in the United States

Category:Airliner bombings in the Soviet Union

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Airliner bombings. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Airliner bombings in the Soviet Union (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Violates WP:OCLOCATION and WP:NARROWCAT; the absolute number of airliner bombings is too small to warrant subdividing, it's unlikely to grow substantially in the future, and the country where a bombing took place is not a central defining characteristic. OCLOCATION dictates that countries of occurrence may be useful for dividing up huge and unwieldy categories, but this isn't one of them. Additionally, this subcategory will forever remain extremely narrow because the subject country no longer exists. Carguychris (talk) 18:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably this is meant to merge Category:Airliner bombings in the Soviet Union to Category:Airliner bombings rather than delete. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, my bad. Carguychris (talk) 21:28, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge for now, with the very uneven distribution between countries, a diffusion by country currently does not make too much sense. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:49, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by auxiliary equipment failure

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by auxiliary equipment failure

Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by instrument failure

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by instrument failure to Category:Aviation accidents and incidents involving flight instrument failure

Nominator's rationale: (1) It's important to specify the type of instrument under discussion. (2) Flight instrument (or navigation system) failure is almost never cited as the solitary cause of a notable aviation accident or incident, making the current name a violation of WP:NARROWCAT or WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. Almost all complex modern civil and military aircraft have multiple redundant systems, and the vast majority of "instrument failure" accidents involve the pilot(s) becoming fixated on a single malfunctioning instrument or system while ignoring other, properly functioning instruments or systems that, if used properly, could have prevented the accident. Investigators typically cite pilot error as the primary cause in such accidents; flight instrument failure is usually secondary. Carguychris (talk) 17:14, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by missile shootdowns

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by missile shootdowns

Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by fighter aircraft shootdowns

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by fighter aircraft shootdowns

Category:Lists of Major League Baseball stolen base leaders

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Lists of Major League Baseball stolen base leaders to Category:Major League Baseball lists

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to parent category. Only three articles. Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:37, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge per nom. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:01, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Labor disputes in Samoa

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Samoa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The only article in this category is Samoa Public Service Association, not a specific dispute. AusLondonder (talk) 06:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Mason (talk) 11:48, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:33, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Labor disputes in Taiwan

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Taiwan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The only article in this category is about the Labour movement in general and not a specific dispute and which is already appropriately categorised. AusLondonder (talk) 06:28, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Mason (talk) 11:48, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:33, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Labor disputes in Luxembourg

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Luxembourg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only article in this category is about a trade union not a specific dispute and which is already appropriately categorised. AusLondonder (talk) 06:02, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Mason (talk) 11:48, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Labor disputes in Vatican City

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Vatican City (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only article in this category is Association of Vatican Lay Workers, which is about a trade union not a specific dispute and which is already appropriately categorised. AusLondonder (talk) 05:52, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Thanks @AusLondonder for digging through these! Mason (talk) 11:48, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Jewish American legal scholars to Category:Jewish American academics and Category:Jewish legal scholars, and keep the latter. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 19:43, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Jewish American legal scholars to Category:Jewish American academics
Propose merging Category:Jewish legal scholars to Category:Jewish scholars

Nominator's rationale: We really don't need to intersection ethnicity/religion with area of scholarship. The category creator needs to review WP:EGRS.Mason (talk) 03:45, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, trivial intersection. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:09, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Oy veh. All I can say is, "trivial intersection" my tuchus. Please excuse my French, I mean Yiddish. ;)
Seriously, though - are you guys totally unaware that Jewish legal scholarship stretches back centuries? (Actually, millenia.) It is deeply embedded in Jewish culture, outlook and ethos - and intertwined with Western legal history. So it's not in the least surprising that there are so many Jewish people among the ranks of Category:American legal scholars - and that so many of the most well-known and widely cited American legal scholars are Jewish.

Here is a small selection of the "google blurbs" that turned up when I googled "Jewish legal scholars history", which should give you a sense of what I'm alluding to:
- Jewish Law and American Law, Volume 2 - Academic Studies Press
Through careful comparative analysis, the essays also turn to Jewish law to provide insights into substantive and conceptual areas of the American legal system, ...
- The Hebrews and the Foundation of Western Law
Starting as early as the second century A.D., Jewish scholars attempted to compile a code of laws from the Torah and other sources, which would assemble all ...
- The Hidden Influence of Jewish Law on the Common Law Tradition
As Christian scholars sought contacts with Jewish intellectuals in order to...
- Jewish Law: A Very Brief Account - David D. Friedman
Jewish law may be the best recorded legal system in the history of the world; there are hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of pages of surviving ...
- Oxford University Press - An Introduction to the History and Sources of Jewish Law
Jewish law has a history stretching from the early period to the modern State of Israel, encompassing: the Talmud, Geonic, and later codifications. // :Instead, the work would take a broader view and include material from the Dead Sea Scrolls, Hellenistic Egypt, Roman law, the Samaritans and the Karaites
- Jewish Law Research Guide | University of Miami School of Law
The Post-Talmudic legal scholars are separated into three historical sub-periods: geonim (700-1050), reshonim (1050-1599), and aharonim (1600-today).

In closing, I've now added 15 more articles to this category, and there are scores more that can be added. Which reminds me: I also created Category:African-American legal scholars a few years back, which now has 42 articles. Like their Jewish counterparts, they bring their own outlook and ethos with them when they engage in legal scholarship. And lastly, I just created the "missing" parent cat, Category:Jewish legal scholars. There are scores of articles about non-American Jewish legal scholars waiting to be added. Anomalous 0 (talk) 11:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Request:Please review Wikipedia:Categorizing articles about people. It will help you make more effective arguments. Also please don't create categories mid-cfd. I've adding the newly created category to the nomination. AND, please don't conflate Israeli legal scholars with Jewish legal scholars. I am aware of the intersection, but I do not think it counts at the intersetion of nationality those things. @Anomalous 0 and Marcocapelle: per updated nom. Mason (talk) 15:49, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. I also agree with the Israeli/Jewish conflation. Being Israeli doesn't mean a person is Jewish and vice versa. We should avoid that. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:17, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison, I just noticed that you're merging Category:Jewish legal scholars into itself. May need to fix that! Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
oops! Should be to the parent categoryMason (talk) 12:00, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge The "American" aspect makes this a trivial intersection. (t · c) buidhe 21:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear. I damn sure messed up when I inadvertently added added "Israeli legal scholars" as a subcat - instead of making it a See also link, as I intended - which is how I have >always< handled that sort of thing over the years. I was totally wiped out when I made those edits - I bungled it twice, actually, and I'm still shaking my head about it! In any event, I have rectified the mistake.

Back to the issue at hand: Why have you all completely ignored the argument I presented showing the very clear pertinence of Jewish legal scholarship? Not a single editor has responded in any way to the case I've made. Regards, Anomalous 0 (talk) 14:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The criterion in WP:EGRS is: "combination is itself recognized as a defining topic that has already been established (in reliable sources showing substantial existing research specific to the topic." The sources you cite above are about Jewish law, which is certainly a significant topic, but not legal scholars who happen to be American Jews. Btw, some of your sources could be used to create a section in the Jewish law article about its influence in Western law, if not an article itself. Kol tuv, ProfGray (talk) 15:22, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. For what it's worth, there are reliable sources that recognize "Jewish lawyers" (or legal scholars) as a defining topic. I don't know why there's no category, maybe it's been proposed and deleted in the past. Sources include:

Hornblass, Jerome. "The Jewish Lawyer." Cardozo L. Rev. 14 (1992): 1639.
Auerbach, Jerold S. "From Rags to Robes: The Legal Profession, Social Mobility and the American Jewish Experience." American Jewish Historical Quarterly 66, no. 2 (1976): 249-284.
Rabbis and Lawyers: The Journey from Torah to Constitution [book], Jerold S. Auerbach
Auerbach, Jerold S. "Prophets or Profits? Liberal Lawyers and Jewish Tradition." Judaism 36, no. 3 (1987): 360.
Simone Ladwig-Winters, (2018) Lawyers Without Rights: The Fate of Jewish Lawyers in Berlin After 1933
Fagen, Melvin M. "The Status of Jewish Lawyers in New York City: A Preliminary Report on a Study Made by the Conference on Jewish Relations." Jewish Social Studies (1939): 73-104.
Wald, Eli. "Jewish Lawyers and the US Legal Profession: The End of the Affair?." Touro L. Rev. 36 (2020): 299.
Greisman, Israel M. "The Jewish Criminal Lawyer's Dilemma." Fordham Urb. LJ 29 (2001): 2413.
Asimow, Michael. "Jewish Lawyers in American Popular Culture." Va. Sports & Ent. LJ 21 (2022): 1.
Sarna, Jonathan D. "Two Jewish Lawyers Named Louis." American Jewish History 94, no. 1 (2008): 1-19.
Meniconi, Antonella. "The expulsion of Jewish lawyers from the legal profession." Razza e: 99.
Jarausch, Konrad H. "Jewish Lawyers in Germany, 1848–1938: the Disintegration of a Profession." The Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook 36, no. 1 (1991): 171-190.
De Benedetti, Paola. "Jewish lawyers at the Court of Turin." Razza e: 153.
Shamir, Ronen. "Nation-building and colonialism: The case of Jewish lawyers in Palestine." International Journal of the Legal Profession 8, no. 2 (2001): 109-123.
Kuhne, Gunther. "The Impact of German Jewish Jurists on German Law until 1933 and Their Immigration Thereafter to the US, Israel, and Other Countries." Tel Aviv U. Stud. L. 15 (2000): 67.

However, rather than create a category, why not create an article with this material? Expand from these few sentences: History of the American legal profession#Jewish lawyers. Thanks. ProfGray (talk) 15:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @ProfGray for breaking down the issue as well as wading through the wall of text! I think your suggestion to make a page is very constructive! @Anomalous 0 please keep your arguments more concise if you want editors to address them on the specifics. Mason (talk) 12:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. @Mason, would it be reasonable to rename (Move) the Category:Jewish American legal scholars to a new Category:Jewish American lawyers, as a subset of Category:American lawyers by ethnicity? As shown with source above, this combination is a defining topic, though it only has an article section and not a full article yet. (I'm not sure if there's enough for Jewish lawyers in general, though examples of De Benedetti, Meniconi, Shamir, Kuhne above would be relevant.)

Btw, there's also List of Jewish American jurists. Does this article imply that there's a defining topic for a category by this name? Thanks, ProfGray (talk) 12:40, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. I assume that there's previously been a Jewish lawyers category, per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_September_3 I think that creating a page with more substance than just a list would be a better place to start. Mason (talk) 11:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on ProfGray's rename suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concur with Mason, Category:Jewish American lawyers has presumably been deleted before, for the same reason as Category:Jewish American legal scholars is nominated now: there is nothing specifically Jewish about American law. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:38, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, or even better delete, as a trivial intersection and the precedent of the Jewish American lawyers category. The fact that Jewish law and the study of it are indeed a thing is completely irrelevant to the biographies of people who happen to be, at the same time, Jewish and American legal scholars. Not every secular Jewish lawyer is a talmudist. There may be room for a topic category on the studies of Jewish law though, but not a people category based on Jewishness of individuals rather than their topic of study. Guideline WP:COPSEP is relevant. Place Clichy (talk) 19:58, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete or merge unless the use of this is only for persons, who are explicitly discussed with respect to their scholarship RS as "Jewish American legal scholar". Not only should we not be getting into 'who is a Jew' in categories, this is not defining until RS define them as that. It is also trivial based on other arguments above. Is raised as a Jew that matters, only genetics, conversion, studied at Hebrew school or the Torah, does the person have to know they are a Jew, a Jew in the right way, 'immigration' 'naturalization', 'born citizen', say the right 'Jewish scholarly' things, say the wrong 'Jewish scholarly' things, etc, etc.? We recently had a BLP, who strongly objected to link to occupation in America, as a kind of pre-WWII Germany, 'list all the Jews in the learned professions' -- or 'you aren't evaluated as every other law scholar (as good as or as bad as), for you are Jewish'. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's a defining intersection with ample literature showing exactly that. I really wish that presumably non-Jewish editors would take a moment to think these things through. I'm getting flashbacks to when my article about kosher supermarkets was deleted by non-Jewish editors who proclaimed without evidence or common sense that "kosher" is a non-defining and trivial intersection with "supermarket". Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 22:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- These are not similar. Kosher supermarkets is a case of applying Jewish law. American law is not a case of applying Jewish law. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Category:Jewish American legal scholars to Category:Jewish American academics and Category:Jewish legal scholars. Keep Category:Jewish legal scholars. There is ample evidence above (see both ProfGray and Anomalous 0's sources) that this is a defining intersection. However, there is no evidence that being an American while also being a Jewish legal scholar is defining. Therefore, that one should be merged. Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Things in the United States that were built by slaves

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

The result of the discussion was: listify and then delete. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Convert Category:Things in the United States that were built by slaves to article Things in the United States that were built by slaves

Nominator's rationale: Unforuntely, I don't think that this is defining because these "things" aren't regularlly defined as built by slaves Mason (talk) 00:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, possibly listify per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:49, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If converted to a list, article should be named Structures in the United States built by slaves. "Things" is so vague. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Listify? If we are listifying, what should the list be called?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reluctant delete/listify, the equivalents I'm familiar with would be "buildings in Germany that used to be concentration camps" or "structures in Europe built by Axis forced labor", both of which unfortunately are not defining due to the horrible scale of Nazi atrocities. (t · c) buidhe 21:54, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 people who self-identify as being of Native American descent

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 15#Category:American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent

Category:Lighthouse of Alexandria

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Lighthouse of Alexandria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, not a defining characteristic of the articles in this category. It rather is a "what links here" collection. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It covers the lighthouse's architect Sostratus of Cnidus, its destruction in the 1303 Crete earthquake, several attempts at duplication, and depictions in fiction. Dimadick (talk) 05:10, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1303 Crete earthquake is a good example, its epicenter wasn't in Egypt, it caused damage all over Crete and Egypt. Lighthouse of Alexandria really isn't a defining characteristic of this earthquake. This applies similarly to the other articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A majority of the (now-13) articles should be removed, or moved to a new Cultural depictions of the Lighthouse of Alexandria if consensus for such a category exists. I'm not sure there will be more than 3 articles left when that is done. Walsh90210 (talk) 19:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the suggestion for a Category:Cultural depictions of the Lighthouse of Alexandria? If that happens, should we also delete this category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:56, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A new cultural depictions category could be a (temporary?) solution, but e.g. Pharos (crater) does not belong there either, it is merely named after the island on which the lighthouse was located. If the new category is created the current category should certainly be deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:28, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for Now No conceptual objection to the category (I expected to iVote keep) but, after purging, we would be left with the main article plus Sostratus of Cnidus. The rest appears to be WP:OCASSOC and WP:PERFCAT. No objection to recreation later if content emerges and no objection to a cultural depictions category (so long as it specific depictions, not just overcategorizing everything about the 7 Wonders in general). - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:10, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Church of Sweden clergymen in Colonial North America

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:Church of Sweden clergymen in Colonial North America

Category:Timex Datalink

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Timex Datalink (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: There's only one page in here along with 8 images that are hosted on Wikimedia commons. Mason (talk) 02:06, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete in the spirit of WP:C2F. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 Mexican side in the Texas Revolution

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:People of Mexican side in the Texas Revolution

Category:Cercle Brugge templates

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Cercle Brugge templates to Category:Cercle Brugge K.S.V. templates

Nominator's rationale: match naming of parent category Microwave Anarchist (talk) 00:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename, this could use have been listed at speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:39, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. Giant Snowman 19:38, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, and agree that WP:CFDS can be used for these kind of cases. Giant Snowman 19:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

September 29

Category:Labor disputes in British West Indies

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

The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Labor disputes in British West Indies to Category:Labor relations in the Caribbean
Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Antigua and Barbuda (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Jamaica (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in the Bahamas (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Trinidad and Tobago (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Saint Kitts and Nevis (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Barbados (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Dominica (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Grenada (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Saint Lucia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Mason (talk) 00:03, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: There's only one page in here British West Indian labour unrest of 1934–1939, and an extraordinary number of redundant parent categories . Mason (talk) 23:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete An example of a categorisation tree that actually makes navigation more difficult and confusing. AusLondonder (talk) 05:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:05, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Labor disputes in Ghana

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 7#Category:Labor disputes in Ghana

Category:Labor disputes in Uganda

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

The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:26, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Labor disputes in Uganda (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. The only page is here (Uganda National Teachers Union) is about a teacher's union, its not about a labor dispute Mason (talk) 23:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:13, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Cenozoic pinnipeds to Category:Prehistoric pinnipeds

Nominator's rationale: Pinnipeds first appeared in the Paleogene, so all pinnipeds are Cenozoic. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge alll per nom. Unnecessary one-category level. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Cenozoic horses to Category:Prehistoric horses

Nominator's rationale: Horses first appeared in the Ypresian, so all horses are Cenozoic. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:56, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Cenozoic bears to Category:Prehistoric bears

Nominator's rationale: Bears first appeared in the late Eocene, so all bears are Cenozoic. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Sexual assault in education

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Sexual assault in education to Category:Sexual harassment in education

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge because there's not really a need to distinguish between type of sexual crimes/abuse etc. Moreover, there isn't a sexual assault tree, it redirects to sexual abuse Mason (talk) 18:45, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Films about con artists

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 20:57, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Films about con artists to Category:Films about scam artists

Nominator's rationale: Consistency with the article scam. And con artist redirects there. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – "con artist" is a significantly more common term than "scam artist". See the ngrams, for example. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per jlwoodwa; if we had an article on con/scam artists (which I'm surprised we don't) the category name would depend on the article, but in lieu of that con artist is the common name. Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Video games based on Guardians of the Galaxy

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Video games based on Marvel Comics and Category:Guardians of the Galaxy. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Video games based on Guardians of the Galaxy to Category:Video games based on Marvel Comics

Nominator's rationale: Only contains two articles. Would also need to merge into Category:Guardians of the Galaxy. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:58, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Video games based on Thor (Marvel Comics)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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) –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Video games based on Thor (Marvel Comics) to Category:Video games based on Marvel Comics

Nominator's rationale: Only contains two entries. Would probably also need to merge into Category:Thor (Marvel Comics) in other media and other appropriate subcategories as well. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:55, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, also merge to "Video games based on" parents, so five targets in total. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:00, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

North German Confederation

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:30, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

REDIRECT Propose renaming Category:1867 in Germany to Category:1867 in the North German Confederation
REDIRECT Propose renaming Category:1868 in Germany to Category:1868 in the North German Confederation
REDIRECT Propose renaming Category:1869 in Germany to Category:1869 in the North German Confederation
REDIRECT Propose renaming Category:1870 in Germany to Category:1870 in the North German Confederation
REDIRECT Propose renaming Category:1867 establishments in Germany to Category:1867 establishments in the North German Confederation
REDIRECT Propose renaming Category:1868 establishments in Germany to Category:1868 establishments in the North German Confederation
REDIRECT Propose renaming Category:1869 establishments in Germany to Category:1869 establishments in the North German Confederation
REDIRECT Propose renaming Category:1870 establishments in Germany to Category:1870 establishments in the North German Confederation
REDIRECT Propose renaming Category:1868 disestablishments in Germany to Category:1868 disestablishments in the North German Confederation
REDIRECT Propose renaming Category:1870 disestablishments in Germany to Category:1870 disestablishments in the North German Confederation

Nominator's rationale: rename and purge, this was a short period after the German Confederation was abolished and the German Empire did not exist yet. In these years there was a North German Confederation led by Prussia, of which Baden and Bavaria were not a member (so they should be purged). If renamed, these categories can also conveniently be added to the tree of Category:North German Confederation. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If renamed, redirects should be left to help with templates. Mason (talk) 23:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, I have added that to the nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by navigation system failure

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:31, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by navigation system failure to Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by instrument failure

Nominator's rationale: No need to distinguish by which instrument failed Mason (talk) 15:41, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. One article can be put in the airliner subcat though. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. FYI, I have nominated the destination category for renaming as Category:Aviation accidents and incidents involving flight instrument failure, primarily because instrument (or navigation system) failure is almost always subsidiary to pilot error in notable aircraft accidents. Only small, simple modern aircraft are configured in such a way that all or most flight instruments are likely to fail simultaneously, and those accidents are seldom notable. Carguychris (talk) 17:21, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Airliner bombings by country

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Airliner bombings by country to Category:Airliner bombings

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. This category isn't helpful for navigation with only two countries in it Mason (talk) 15:40, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Violates WP:OCLOCATION and WP:NARROWCAT; the absolute number of airliner bombings is too small to warrant subdividing, it's unlikely to grow substantially in the future, and the country where a bombing took place is not a central defining characteristic. OCLOCATION dictates that countries of occurrence may be useful for dividing up huge and unwieldy categories, but this isn't one of them, and is unlikely to ever be. Carguychris (talk) 18:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Reinforcement technology (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Vague category that doesn't help navigation. Nor is in limited to the parent category of Reinforced concrete Mason (talk) 15:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Satellite meteorology in Europe

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Satellite meteorology. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Satellite meteorology in Europe (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only page isn't about Satellite meteorology in Europe. It's a method that's not exclusive to Europe Mason (talk) 15:34, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principle per nom, but I guess this should be merged to Category:Satellite meteorology. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:32, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great suggestion! Mason (talk) 23:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Health services research

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Health services research to Category:Health research

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There's no parent Health services, so I see not benefit to isolating this content Mason (talk) 15:31, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, but the subcategory can be excluded from the merge operation, it is already in the tree of Category:Health research. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:35, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was: single merge. (non-admin closure) Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:22, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:Door surrounds to Category:Doors and Category:Architectural elements

Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge this underpopulated category Mason (talk) 15:22, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, but to Category:Architectural elements only, the article is already in Category:Door furniture. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me Mason (talk) 03:23, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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) –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose splitting Category:Barbuda Highlands to Category:Protected areas of Antigua and Barbuda and Category:Geography of Barbuda

Nominator's rationale: Dual merge. There are only two pages in this category, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 15:19, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principle, but afterwards purge Castle Hill (Barbuda) from Category:Protected areas of Antigua and Barbuda, it does not belong there. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:40, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me Mason (talk) 03:22, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Antigua and Barbuda defence and national security law

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:37, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Antigua and Barbuda defence and national security law to Category:Law of Antigua and Barbuda

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge this underpopulated category that at present isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 15:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:43, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Antiguan and Barbudan spacewomen

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Space tourists. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:37, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Antiguan and Barbudan spacewomen to Category:Antigua and Barbuda women and Category:Space tourists‎

Nominator's rationale: Duel upmerge. There's no need to diffuse space tourists by the 2x intersection of nationality and gender Mason (talk) 15:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Single merge because the article is already in Category:Antigua and Barbuda women in business. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:British Asian actors

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 7#Category:British Asian actors

Category:Collaborators during World War II occupations

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 7#Category:Collaborators during World War II occupations

Category:Student history societies

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Student history societies to Category:Historical societies

Nominator's rationale: Category contains a single article and is unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 13:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principle but merge also to Student subject associations. Mason (talk) 14:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. If it is a student association then by all means dual merge, but that is not super clear from the article text. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:16, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Mortgage industry of Spain

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Mortgage industry of Spain to Category:Housing in Spain

Nominator's rationale: Contains only a single article which is actually about a housing rights organisation. AusLondonder (talk) 13:18, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. now that I've added the single article to a Mortgage related category. Mason (talk) 14:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:19, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 7#Category:AAGPBL teams

Category:Sexual assaults in Germany

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Sexual assaults in Germany to Category:Sex crimes in Germany

Nominator's rationale: Contains only one article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 13:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Also the category tree Sexual assault is overlapping. Mason (talk) 14:00, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. We do not even have Category:Sexual assaults. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(We only do now because have now turned it into a redirect) Mason (talk) 03:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:British swimming sports executives

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:British swimming sports executives to Category:Swimming sports executives

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary sub-category, contains two articles while parent contains none. We already have Category:Presidents of World Aquatics. AusLondonder (talk) 12:53, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support now that both have been added to British sports executives and administrators. Mason (talk) 14:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Diseases and disorders

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 7#Category:Diseases and disorders

Category:Student debating societies in the United Kingdom

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Student debating societies and Category:Student culture in the United Kingdom. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Student debating societies in the United Kingdom to Category:Student debating societies

Nominator's rationale: Category containing two redirects, unnecessary sub-categorisation by country, can easily be accommodated in the parent category. AusLondonder (talk) 12:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in theory, but it should also be merged to Student culture in the United Kingdom Mason (talk) 14:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge per above. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Star Wars puppets

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

The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Star Wars puppets (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is referring to characters, not the puppets themselves. While these characters may once have been depicted as a puppet, that is certainly not true for all of their appearances. Jabba and Yoda were depicted as CGI at times. Ackbar is more of a human actor in costume than a puppet. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:36, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom, given that none of th pages are specifically about puppets. Mason (talk) 14:04, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Taxation in Texas

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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). –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Taxation in Texas to Category:State taxation in the United States

Nominator's rationale: only page in here isn't unique to texas Mason (talk) 05:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Many siblings may be nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Guqin and Category:Music education. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Guqin educators to Category:Guqin

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one page in here, and its an internet directory of educators, not any bios of specific educators. Mason (talk) 02:26, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge, also to Category:Music education. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good suggestion! Mason (talk) 14:03, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Defunct airlines of the Caribbean and Category:Companies of Grenada. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Defunct airlines of Grenada (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article which is List of defunct airlines of Grenada. Unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 02:12, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why not merge it to Defunct airlines of the Caribbean, Defunct airlines by country, and Airlines of Grenada? Please consider what happens to the contents of the category when you recommend delete. Mason (talk) 02:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because the first two are container categories and the third is a category with no articles and which this list is unsuitable for. I also think the list article is already appropriately categorised. AusLondonder (talk) 02:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge to Category:Defunct airlines of the Caribbean and Category:Airlines of Grenada. The former does not have to be a container category, there are lots of subcategories in it that can be upmerged too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe to defunct airlines of the Caribbean, but the Airlines of Grenada category is currently empty other than this category. AusLondonder (talk) 00:50, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair point, then merge to Category:Defunct airlines of the Caribbean and Category:Companies of Grenada instead. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:21, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Diplomatic missions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Foreign relations of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. (non-admin closure) Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Diplomatic missions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation as contains no actual diplomatic missions and only one article, the List of diplomatic missions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. AusLondonder (talk) 02:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principle, per nom, but merge to Category:Foreign relations of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:11, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:British businesspeople in the natural gas industry

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. (non-admin closure) Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:26, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:British businesspeople in the natural gas industry to Category:British energy industry businesspeople

Nominator's rationale: Contains only a single article which is about the chief executive of an energy supplier. AusLondonder (talk) 14:35, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't it also be merged to Category:Businesspeople in the gas industry? Marcocapelle (talk) 06:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AusLondonder: thoughts? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:20, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No objection to that. AusLondonder (talk) 02:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:53, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge to both. Mason (talk) 02:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Finishing (construction)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Construction and further discussion of the categorization of Exterior insulation finishing system can take place at Talk:Exterior insulation finishing system. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Finishing (construction) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Useless category containing a single article. AusLondonder (talk) 13:52, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't it be merged to its parent category? This is really just a question, 'no' can also be a good answer. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:45, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AusLondonder: merge? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:26, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:53, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in theory, but adding to the parent is probably a good idea. Mason (talk) 14:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Religion in the Middle East

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:Religion in the Middle East

Category:Party lists

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. A merge proposal suggesting Category:Electoral lists as a target might find consensus. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Party lists to Category:Lists of political candidates by nationality

Nominator's rationale: Party lists are also lists of candidates. The distinction between the two categories isn't apparent and thus makes it harder to find similar lists in other countries. Dajasj (talk) 05:58, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, per nom, but then move Category:Candidate lists for European Parliament elections directly under Category:Lists of political candidates. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To add to this, State list (Germany) also needs another place Dajasj (talk) 07:53, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Electoral lists The article discussing "party lists" is called "electoral list," so I feel the category should match the article title. I oppose the proposed merge target because it seems more confusing than helpful. (Political parties are not nationalities). - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 18:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Hm, this is clearly an unnecessary fork. They should all three be merged together.~~ Marcocapelle (talk) 18:31, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. The articles in your proposed target include countries that don't use party list systems (e.g., the United States). "Electoral lists" are lists of candidates in specific systems. It makes sense that we have a category dedicated to these types of lists. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the "nationalities" part is also not ideal. But the articles in Category:Electoral lists are a different type of articles, not a list of candidates but a description of a single electoral group. Not sure whether these belong in the same category?Dajasj (talk) 19:08, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Party list" is given as type of electoral list in the lead of the article. I guess there's an argument that this category should be a subcategory of Category:Electoral lists, but I don't really see the need for two separate categories here. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:56, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Only now I realize there is confusion between Wikipedia lists versus real-life lists (as a topic in its own right). There should be two independent trees after all. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your latest changes made it so that Category:Party lists in South African general elections is not part of Category:Lists of political candidates by nationality, which I believe it should be because it is a list of candidates. Dajasj (talk) 06:17, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, Category:Lists of political candidates by nationality is for Wikipedia list articles, not for real-life lists like Party lists. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:34, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but the article is both an overview of real-life lists as well as a Wikipedia list of all candidates. (except for the Philippines for some reason). Dajasj (talk) 07:28, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For those favoring a merge, do you agree with the updated Category:Electoral lists target? There is no clear consensus on whether a merge should happen, so a relist is also to allow for participation to determine if there is consensus for any merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 23:51, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See previous relist comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:47, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Spanish anarcho-syndicalists

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Anarcho-syndicalists and Category:Spanish anarchists. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Spanish anarcho-syndicalists to Category:Spanish anarchists

Nominator's rationale: Redundant categorisation as most Spanish anarcho-syndicalists were members of the CNT and the few left over aren't meaningfully distinct from other categories of Spanish anarchists. Grnrchst (talk) 16:47, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, this category just adds clutter AnarchistHistory (talk) 17:24, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If not kept, at least dual merge, also to Category:Anarcho-syndicalists. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also dual merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 16:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same question: Also dual merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also dual merge. Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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:Constituencies of the National Assembly of Botswana (historic)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:Constituencies of the National Assembly of Botswana (historic)

Category:Southend-on-Sea (district)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Category:Southend-on-Sea (district)

Today's discussions and up to 7 days old

Old CfD discussions

Very old CfD discussions

Very very old CfD Discussions

43 to 49 days old

October 19

Category:Classical Marxist parties in the United States

Category:Video games by narrative genre

Category:All articles with inline parenthetical referencing

Category:All Elite Wrestling personnel

Category:Settlement of the pro-Japanese collaboration

Alta California before 1824

Category:People from Akseki

Category:Wikipedia administrator elections 2024 voter guides

Category:People from Chataignier, Louisiana

Category:People from Athens, Louisiana

Category:People from Woodburn, Kentucky

Category:People from Walnut, Illinois

Category:People from Eastford, Connecticut

Category:Private schools Northern Beaches Sydney

Category:People from Loxley, Alabama

Category:Ancient Indian monarchies

Category:Songwriter unknown

Category:Middle kingdoms of India

Category:Water polo teams in Czechoslovakia

Category:Czechoslovak water polo people

Category:3rd-century Vietnamese women

Category:Online-only games

Category:Over the Hedge video games

Summer camps in fiction

Comedy directors

Category:Historical figures with ambiguous or disputed sexuality

Category:French troubadours

Category:Criminals from Fort Lauderdale, Florida

October 18

Category:People by republican city or municipality in Latvia

Reformed Christianity

Category:Lists of concert tours

Category:Speedrunning communities

Category:People from Hartshead

Category:People from Hamstall Ridware

Category:People from Doveridge

Category:2028 United States Senate elections

Category:Mosques of Leicestershire

October 17

Category:Esports techniques

Category:User-specific file copyright templates

Category:World Series at Yankee Stadium

Category:Marvel Cinematic Universe music

Category:Members of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre

Category:Botswana constituencies in Selebi-Phikwe

Category:Elk and red deer

Category:Prohibition-era gangsters

Category:Ugandan dermatologists

Category:Fictional characters who can manipulate reality

October 16

Category:Urdu-language women writers

Category:LGBTQ-related suicides

Category:Louisville Black Caps

Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by fighter aircraft shootdowns

Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by missile shootdowns

Category:Airliner bombings in the United States

Category:Defunct airlines of Réunion

Category:Defunct airlines of Guadeloupe

Category:The Wild Thornberrys films

Category:People from Crigglestone

Category:People from Bounds Green

Category:People from Bamber Bridge

Category:People from Anderton, Lancashire

Category:People from Polgooth

Category:People from Manaccan

Category:History of Yugoslavia

Category:Articles on pre-1900 earthquakes

Category:Second ladies and gentlemen of the Philippines

Early abbots by century

Category:Society of Ukrainian Progressors members

October 15

Category:Pilot intake jet fighter

Category:National Hockey League in the Sun Belt

Category:National Hockey League in Alberta