Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 8 to 21 days

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut

Today's discussions and up to 7 days old

[edit]

See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All current discussions

8 to 14 days old

[edit]

December 14

[edit]

Category:Romance culture

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is not defining, and doesn't seem accurate. This category says its culture by language family. However, Culture of Vatican City isn't defined by "Romance culture" SMasonGarrison 23:38, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 men centenarians

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersections between gender, ethnicity/religion, and longevity. I don't think that this meets the standard under Wikipedia:EGRS. SMasonGarrison 22:15, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Boycotts of apartheid South Africa

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 22#Category:Boycotts of apartheid South Africa

Category:People from the Crown of Castile

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories. If merged, this category should be left as a redirect. If not merged, I think we need an extremely clear definition of how these categories are distinct. SMasonGarrison 17:01, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from the Crown of Aragon

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories. SMasonGarrison 16:58, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:National blood donation authorities

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 16:52, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 vapor deposition techniques

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: vague, upmerge to the underpopulated parent SMasonGarrison 16:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Printing registration

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Duel upmerge. underpopulated category upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 16:41, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Intersex and medicine

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: See Intersex healthcare, Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 18#Category:Intersex or Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 13#Category:Transgender and medicine.

So Category:Intersex healthcare or Category:Intersex topics and medicine? --MikutoH talk! 03:23, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on alt?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with Intersex healthcare SMasonGarrison 17:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decades in history

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, no clear distinction versus their parent category. The decades as a whole are, or will become, part of history. The merge needs to happen manually because many articles are already in, e.g., Category:2000s decade overviews. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:07, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the category Category: 2020s in history has a few highly useful and highly specific roles ; a) it is for articles describing history in a broad narrative style , namely, 2020s in history, 2020s in military history, 2020s in Asian history, etc etc. and b) it is also for sub-categories pertaining to that decade's history, such as Category: 2020s in military history, Category:2020s in women's history, etc; so clearly those are not limited only to articles that are decade overviews.
And Category:2020s is clearly a broad umbrella category, with hugely wide scope, so it is not interchangeable with this category. Sm8900 (talk) 19:52, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Deaths from cardiovascular disease

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Procedural nomination. This cat was tagged for speedy deletion as G4. There was indeed a CfD back in 2021 where this was deleted by consensus. I declined the speedy because this was a lot of material to remove without a discussion, and IMHO I felt this call was just outside of the trust of the community for any one single trusted user. I have no interest in the outcome. BusterD (talk) 13:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Adding on the previous: if the category is not kept then at least the subcategories should be moved to Category:Deaths by type of illness. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:00, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can get a clearer consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Both defining, and relatively easy to locate available sources on it. Dimadick (talk) 14:43, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Slavery in Italy

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 22#Category:Slavery in Italy

Category:Slavery in Germany

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:54, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Non-governmental organizations

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Note that I'm proposing purging rather than deletion; however, there may be a case to be made that deletion might be preferable due to the scope of the problem.
The term does have a technical definition, but is routinely overused to the point of meaninglessness in the real world, encompassing nearly any organization that exists at all regardless of whether it fits the technical definition of an "NGO" or not — so previous discussions (e.g. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 April 5#Category:Non-governmental organizations by country) have established a consensus that trying to categorize for the distinction between organizations that are "non-governmental" and organizations that are not "non-governmental" was not a productive use of wikipedians' time and energy. Accordingly, the category explicitly has a usage note on it saying "This is not a category for articles about individual organizations", as well as a {{Diffuse}} template on it, but unsurprisingly is quite populated by articles about individual organizations. Bearcat (talk) 03:01, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Mother runners

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This seems to be a category for runners who are also mothers. Proposed deletion per WP:TRIVIALCAT which states Avoid categorizing topics by characteristics that are unrelated or wholly peripheral to the topic's notability. 1857a (talk) 02:26, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that motherhood is peripheral to an athlete’s notability. The decision to have children is one of the most consequential decisions a person can make, and even more so among elite runners whose job depends on the ability to use their bodies to train and perform at the highest levels of the sport. Consider the difference between this and something like a notional “Redheaded Runners” and I think it becomes quite clear.
This categorization may be helpful to Wikipedia readers as there has been media attention on the issue of elite runners losing contracts/health insurance because they became pregnant. See link for example.
In addition, there is an entire brand with books, a podcast, speaking tour, etc (of which I have no affiliation) called Another Mother Runner which brings attention to the intersectionality of motherhood and runners. It started in 2011 and is well-known. Aschbren (talk) 12:05, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per WP:TRIVIALCAT. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It's not a defining feature. These people are not regularly described as "Mother runners". SMasonGarrison 17:16, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Whether it is a common term or not is irrelevant per guidelines for categorization. I’ve never heard the phrase “21st century sportswomen” outside of a Wikipedia category, but that is not being challenged.
    Also, the premise of the above is inconsistent with facts per a quick Google search reveals. Aschbren (talk) 20:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Whether or not people are 'regularly described' as it or not, the fact is that the intersection of 'being a mother' and 'being a runner' is trivial. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:05, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    First of all, that’s a tautology so logically irrelevant.
    Second, trivial means something “of little value or importance.” On the contrary, the decision of elite runners to have children has profound implications on their professional careers. This has been discussed in memoirs, articles, podcasts, and interviews. Just because something is “of little importance” to one of us, doesn’t mean it’s of little importance to the world beyond Wikipedia. In fact, as noted above the category would be useful and appreciated by readers of Wikipedia.
    The fact that Wikipedia biographies have a category like people born in 1991 would, in fact, be trivial because it’s not connected to the notability of the subject. Again, that is not being challenged.
    As a side benefit, it also would help counter perceptions that Wikipedia suffers from a lack of diversity in its viewpoints. This is irrelevant to the argument, admittedly, but would be a small step in improving the reputation of the Wikipedia brand. Aschbren (talk) 13:44, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, and this would be part of WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS, then. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:34, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It’s not righting wrongs to create a categorization that meets all criteria for creation, is noteworthy in its own right, is useful to readers, and is independently verifiable from other sources. I was just pointing out that Wikipedia has been accused of ignoring non-diverse points of view, and this category would help counter that narrative. I even pointed out that’s irrelevant per the guidelines. Aschbren (talk) 00:05, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, none of the articles mentions this prominently. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:01, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Per the categorization guidelines, “For articles about people, categorize by characteristics of the person the article is about, not characteristics of the article.” Hence being featured prominently in the articles is irrelevant to the category. Also, content exists such that it could be folded into articles in the category. Aschbren (talk) 19:59, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unclear definition. Is this for professional runners who gave birth during their career, after it, or before it? All of those? Some of those? Only one's whose career was affected by it, how significantly? Do adoptions count? Do step children count? I see what we're going for though. In my brain, this is along the lines of having a category for Catholic or Muslim runners. I just checked and those categories don't exist. Gravel for breakfast (talk) 14:46, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Because the category could be further sub-divided as you note doesn’t mean the categorization isn’t valid. If the category becomes unwieldy, sure it could be further divided in the future.
    Independent sources consistently describe included athletes as mothers and as runners, meaning it is objective per categorization guidelines. Given the amount of media attention, memoirs, podcasts, etc that exist on the topic indicate they are not unrelated facets.
    Arguing that x shouldn’t exist because y doesn’t already exist is invalid per categorization guidelines. Also, Muslim Runners may not exist as a category but Muslim Poets does for example. (I have no opinion on whether that should or should not exist.) Aschbren (talk) 15:17, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete trivial intersection of 2 non connected things. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:51, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As noted above there is significant independent source material about this specific intersectionality indicating they are not unrelated. As Wikipedians, it shouldn’t matter if you or I think they are related (or not). It only matters that other independent sources have consistently and regularly recognized this as a thing that exists, and Wikipedia should reflect that already existing reality. We take no position on whether it should exist or whether it existing is a good thing or a bad thing, but simply noting the existence of the intersectionality is neutral per categorization guidelines. Aschbren (talk) 15:23, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As Wikipedians, it shouldn’t matter if you or I think they are related (or not)- it does matter, because that's how Wikipedia defines categories. This category is WP:TRIVIALCAT and WP:NOTDEFINING. Also, you don't need to reply to every single person that disagrees with you, as it's WP:BLUDGEONing. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:37, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Independent sources independent and reliably describe the included athletes as mothers and as runners. Simply asserting it does not does not make it so
    Others are assuming the premise (it’s trivial, therefore it’s trivial). I’m pointing out with reasoning that independent sources show otherwise. How is a discussion supposed to take place if we do not discuss? I’m happy to be proven wrong, and I hope others are similarly objective. Please do not assume ill intent. (See guidelines for dispute resolution) Aschbren (talk) 16:23, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You need to demonstrate why it's a defining category that should be kept. Of the people in the category, almost half of the article don't mention that the person either has children, most just state it as a 1-2 sentence side thought to the main article, and only 2 or 3 articles have a paragraph or more about competing as a mother/getting back to fitness after giving birth. That is why I don't believe this category is necessary, because being a "running mother" isn't a defining trait for most of the people- they're notable as runners. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:14, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Television-screenshots of Pokémon

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Single-member category which is unhelpful for navigation; dual upmerge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:22, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dual merge per nom. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 21:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Support-group-stub

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Stub template of unclear utility. It's currently being used on just two articles, with the result that it's filing them directly in Category:Organization stubs instead of having its own dedicated "Support group stubs" category -- but because both of those articles also already have {{US-org-stub}} on them, which files them in the Category:United States organization stubs subcategory, that means this template is adding absolutely nothing but unnecessary duplicate categorization. Bearcat (talk) 02:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Circumstances can change, though. Even if it was approved 15 years ago, a template can still sometimes end up being so underused that it's no longer adding any value. For example, in 2007 we didn't have nearly as many [Specific Country]-org-stub templates (or their associated categories) as we do now, so it may well have made more sense at that time to have dedicated templates for specific types of organizations — but as things stand in 2024, the only thing it's actually doing anymore is causing two organizations to be duplicate-categorized in both Category:Organization stubs and Category:United States organization stubs at the same time, which neither of them need to be. I'd certainly be willing to withdraw this if somebody could actually find 58 more support group stubs to justify the creation of a full-on Category:Support group stubs category, but if it's just leaving the articles in a parent category that they don't need to be in, because they're already in another subcategory of that same parent, then there's not much point in it anymore. Bearcat (talk) 16:39, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:African cricket ground stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated stub categories not approved through proper process. As always, stub categories are not free for just any user to create on a whim for any narrowcast topic of their own choice -- the minimum size bar for a stub category is 60 articles, so stub categories have to be approved for creation through WikiProject Stub sorting. None of these were approved through that process at all, however, and none of them have 60 articles in them -- and unlike the similar batch I nominated below, in this set even the continent-level categories can't be salvaged, because even just upmerging the country-level subcategories to their continent-level parents still won't get to 60. Bearcat (talk) 00:56, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:02, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge It would be difficult to make lists of 60 notable cricket grounds (whether stub or of decent length) for some of these countries, such as kenya or Zimbabwe. Australia can probably manage it, but with the cat sizes as they stand, none of these stub cats can be justified. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:33, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Most of these countries won't have 60 notable cricket grounds (SA and Aus being only 2 possible exceptions), and if in future, one of these countries has 60 stub cricket grounds that are all notable, then and only then should these be considered for re-creation (via proper process). Joseph2302 (talk) 10:39, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom, even if any of this country gets 60+ notable grounds, it's unlikely for all of them to be left as stubs at the same time. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 12:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bangladeshi cricket ground stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated stub categories not approved through proper process. As always, stub categories are not free for just any user to create on a whim for any narrowcast topic of their own choice -- the minimum size bar for a stub category is 60 articles, so stub categories have to be approved for creation through WikiProject Stub sorting. But none of these were approved through that process at all, and none of them have 60 articles in them -- a couple of sibling categories do surpass that bar, so I'm leaving well enough alone even though they weren't properly approved either, but none of the rest of these are large enough. Bearcat (talk) 00:32, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:De Havilland Canada Dash 7

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category only contains its epynomonous article (already in the parent category) and an accidents subcategory (which doesn't belong in the aircraft-by-manufacturer category, and is already categorised correctly otherwise). The Bushranger One ping only 00:03, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


December 13

[edit]

Category:Years AD by century

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer, they are the only subcategory of their parent. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:24, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Years AD and Category:Years BC.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Publicity photographs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category is populated by the use of the licensing template {{Non-free promotional}} on image files. The text of the template reads, in part, This is a copyrighted image that has been released by a company or organization to promote their work or product in the media, such as advertising material or a promotional photo in a press kit. This scope, reflected in how the template is used, includes publicity photos, but also ads and promotional artwork. The following subcategories should also be renamed per this change:
 • Category:Publicity photographs with missing fair-use rationale to Category:Promotional images with missing fair-use rationale
 • Category:Publicity photographs with no terms to Category:Promotional images with no terms
 • Category:Publicity photographs with terms of use to Category:Promotional images with terms of use
Thanks.— TAnthonyTalk 20:01, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag the categories.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - I almost "weak opposed" this, but since this is an internal process (and on files only, not on articles), I won't oppose it. However, if this goes through, there should be a category redirect for/to the parent cat, in case someone besides the automation wants to find these. - jc37 21:47, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People by criminal charge

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Seems to be a clear consensus at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Category:People charged with rape that including articles in categories such as "People charged with X" is a violation of the policy on including BLPs in criminal-related categories at WP:BLPCRIMINAL.

WP:BLPCRIMINAL states that a requirement for inclusion in a sub-category of Category:Criminals is that "the subject was convicted; and the conviction was not overturned on appeal.".

Given that many of the proposed categories already have sub-categories for people who were convicted, keeping categories for "people charged with X" just invites articles to be added to the "people charged with X" criminal categories before they've been tried and/or convicted.

For any subcategories that are "People convicted of X" or "People acquitted of X", I would propose relocating them to be under Category:People by criminal conviction and Category:People acquitted of crimes, respectively, if they aren't already there. RachelTensions (talk) 17:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question: What about for non-BLPs? Some people surely died before they were convicted, which in some cases is defining enough. I still don't get why we need a separate convicted of tree in addition to the actual crime category. Ideally we'd delete those too, but that will never happen. I feel like in a world where we restricted this to only non-BLPs this category would be fine, but I don't think that's feasible. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:31, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, with one exception: Category:People charged with apostasy in Iran has been nominated elsewhere for renaming to "convicted". Marcocapelle (talk) 21:14, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support in principle. However, I don't think that we can just delete the categories without handling the fact that they have the charged crime in common. For example, we would need to move People convicted of crimes against humanity to crimes against humanity otherwise after the deletion, it would only be in People convicted of international crimes. I do wonder if converting the categories into container categories with this explanation about policy would facilitate navigation. SMasonGarrison 21:46, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: Category:People charged with apostasy in Iran has now been deleted as a result of the discussion elsewhere. RachelTensions (talk) 03:15, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose mass deletion. For clarity, BLPCRIMINAL states: Category:Criminals and its subcategories should be added only for an incident that is relevant to the person's notability; the incident was published by reliable third-party sources; the subject was convicted; and the conviction was not overturned on appeal. If we are including verifiable content in articles that state people were charged with X, per WP:BLPCRIME via WP:BLPPUBLIC, then how does it suddenly become a BLPVIO to place them in a cat that says they were charged with X? Sean Combs, for example, charged with racketeering and sex trafficking. Is that not now relevant to his notability? WP:CATV says Categorization of articles must be verifiable. It should be clear from verifiable information in the article why it was placed in each of its categories. And some of these people in these cats are dead, so BLPCRIMINAL doesn't apply. For instance, Jeffrey Epstein, charged with sex trafficking, which is quite clearly relevant to his notability. We also have Category:Sexual misconduct allegations, these are just allegations, some of the people in this cat have never been charged, tried or convicted. Joe Biden and Clarence Thomas are both in that cat. Are we saying that cat is a BLPVIO as well? If someone wants to make a case by case basis to exclude a BLP from a cat, that is fine, but I oppose this mass deletion per the rationale provided. Isaidnoway (talk) 22:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, that sexual misconduct allegations category is also a BLP violation. As for the category requirements for Category:Criminals, relevance to notability is only one requirement, while another requirement is that "the subject was convicted". So anyone who should be in that category would already have a conviction and can be in a "convicted" category rather than "charged with". For BLP violations, the policy is to remove the information and then to determine if the information was appropriate to include, not to include potential violations and then make case-by-case determinations whether to exclude. Further, BLPs without a conviction should not be included in a criminal category or subcategory at all under our policies. As for deceased individuals or historical cases, I believe the proper course of action would be to create a new category that is specific to that designation and would not apply to any living people. – notwally (talk) 00:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So you think that sexual misconduct allegations category that includes articles about sexual misconduct allegations against prominent public figures like Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby, Sean Combs, Michael Jackson, Donald Trump, Woody Allen, Kevin Spacey, Clarence Thomas, Harvey Weinstein, is a BLPVIO? I don't know, I don't think you'll find community consensus for that POV. Isaidnoway (talk) 10:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Some of those people have convictions and should be in the appropriate category for those with convictions. For the rest, they are a BLP violation. WP:BLPCRIMINAL is clear. Categories alleging criminal allegations can only be included if there is a conviction that is not overturned on appeal. If you disagree with the policy, then you need to get the policy changed. – notwally (talk) 22:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, that sexual misconduct allegations category is also a BLP violation + WP:BLPCRIMINAL is clear. If you disagree with that category, then you need to nominate it for deletion. Please see our deletion policy and how to use CfD, if you are unsure about the proper procedures, or don't know how to start a deletion discussion. Isaidnoway (talk) 13:31, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a pending discussion (right here) about related categories and how to proceed, and I don't see how it would any sense to start another deletion discussion until this one is resolved. If you would like to take this opportunity to explain how sexual assault allegations are not allegations of criminal conduct, feel free. – notwally (talk) 22:46, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course sexual assault allegations are allegations of criminal conduct, and it appears there is a long standing consensus to put those sort of articles in Category:Sexual misconduct allegations, considering that cat is seven years old, and has sixty articles in it. Feel free to start a discussion on the talk pages on any of those sixty pages outling your serious concerns. There's no need to wait for this discussion to be resolved. Like you said, WP:BLPCRIMINAL is clear, so you shouldn't encounter any objections. Isaidnoway (talk) 11:39, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The user you’re replying to apparently believes that people merely accused of a crime are criminals,[1] which is obviously not true from a legal and BLP perspective, so they have different views on crime than most of the world and the Wikipedia community. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 15:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, no caveats. These categories are all clearly BLP violations and should be deleted as soon as possible. Loki (talk) 00:06, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete These categories have existed for too long and all of them that include living people violate BLPCRIME. For anyone who has a conviction, they should be put in a "convicted" category. There are cases where a "charged with" or similar category may be relevant (e.g., historical figures charged with witchcraft), but those should be handled with proper categories that exclude any living people. – notwally (talk) 00:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Notwally How do you propose it being covered in a way to exclude living people? That doesn’t seem possible by just changing the name. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:48, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think those with better knowledge of categories would be able to offer more useful suggestions. Some things also don't need to be categorized. – notwally (talk) 03:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, you said above that the "proper course of action" would be to "create a new category that is specific to that designation and would not apply to any living people", which I do not think is possible. I do think the deletion of this category creates a problem for the existence of the convicted/acquitted of cats, which should also probably be deleted. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:42, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The acquitted, yes, but the convicted can stay. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:47, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Without the existence of the others that category makes no sense. It's part of the set. The convictions aren't the defining bit, any more than acquitted is, it is the crime. Without that, we don't need an oversimplified version of the conviction as a category in addition to the actual criminal category. For example, people convicted of murder is just a worse way to put someone in the murderer category. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:04, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • If it's not possible, then they should just not be categorized. It is possible for others, such as my prior example of "historical figures charged with witchcraft". – notwally (talk) 22:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I don't think that is a logical thing to categorize by if the wider tree does not exist. People still get charged with witchcraft in some places, so "historical" is an arbitrary cutoff. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:02, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      It means the people are by definition not living. "People accused in the Salem witch trials" is a current subcategory of the categories under discussion, which is another way to limit the category to non-living people. If you don't think that is adequate, then the category simply should not exist at all. WP:BLPCRIMINAL is a policy, and an important one. – notwally (talk) 23:38, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I'm not arguing for the category to be kept, but I would like consistency in how this is handled relative to other categories, since I think the non-BLP problems with this category apply to several others. "Historical figure" is a category type we only have three of, and I would say is a poor fit for this situation so I see no reason to make more. I think they should simply all be deleted (meaning ones related to status of criminal process, e.g. convicted/acquitted/whatever other ones we have). PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:18, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose mass deletion. There are several dead historical figures captured by these categories for whom BLP does not apply. Charges against, e.g., Augusto Pinochet and Slobodan Milošević are signifcant enough to be mentioned in their leads, and should be reflected by categories. Renaming the categories to include only deceased people would eliminate the BLP concern without losing the navigation tool for historical figures. Additionally, some of these categories (blasphemy, witchcraft, apostasy) relate to charges that would be widely understood to be persecution, rather than morally culpable crimes, and warrant a separate discussion.--Trystan (talk) 15:54, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Renaming the categories to include only deceased people would eliminate the BLP concern without losing the navigation tool for historical figures. Do you have suggestions on how to rename the categories to make it clear they're not for living people? "Deceased people charged with X"? Whatever it is, it needs to be crystal clear that the categories in question are not meant for living people.
    The question becomes how much actual value do these categories add that it warrants the trouble of splitting off the dead from the living just so they can be categorized for crimes they were never convicted of? RachelTensions (talk) 23:31, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Deceased" is fine, or "Historical", with the category descriptions in either case clarifying not to apply it to anyone covered by WP:BLP or WP:BDP. I think they add a lot of value. Particularly in Category:People indicted for crimes against humanity, there are several articles where the charges are not only defining, but are the central reason for their notability.--Trystan (talk) 00:19, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am cautiously relisting this. There is clear consensus (both in numbers and given the strength of a BLP argument) that something needs to change. Is renaming an acceptable outcome? If so, what should the new name be?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, or rename the categories to specify deceased/historical figures when appropriate, or change the policy. The policy as written is unambiguous. As others have said, deleting these categories would create a manual recategorization job. I assume that a renaming of them would involve a more onerous job going through each individual article in every category, which could take time or be forgotten about; BLP violations are time sensitive, so based on that I think WP:TNT is the better option. Safrolic (talk) 07:45, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion for the same reasons given by other opponents. AHI-3000 (talk) 23:17, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Eventual closer should remember that WP:LOCALCONSENSUS cannot override PAG, especially when it comes to BLP. The policy is unambiguous. 04:43, 21 December 2024 (UTC) Safrolic (talk) 04:43, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. It doesn't matter if they're alive or dead, being criminally charged is not sufficient for categorization. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Why not, if it is defining? For Marie Besnard and Aisling Brady McCarthy, the only thing they are notable for is being charged with murder. The latter is still living, so BLP may compel us to leave her with no categories capturing her only claim to notability. But where BLP doesn't apply, why would we choose to leave articles without categories capturing their central defining aspects?--Trystan (talk) 16:24, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose deletion, WP:BLPCRIMINAL is clear that while care and consideration is required there is a valid BLP purpose to be served by such categories. "Caution should be used with content categories that suggest a person has a poor reputation (see false light). For example, Category:Criminals and its subcategories should be added only for an incident that is relevant to the person's notability; the incident was published by reliable third-party sources; the subject was convicted; and the conviction was not overturned on appeal." There may be individual BLP violations in this mass of data, but the existance of the categories is unambiguously not a BLP violation. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: #1 maybe there's a WP:BLP reason for removing BLPs from these categories, but that wouldn't apply to non-BLPs, so it's not a reason to delete the categories altogether. #2 WP:BLPCRIMINAL says Caution should be used, it does not create a blanket prohibition. If caution has not been used in assigning these categories to certain articles, then maybe the categories should be removed from those articles; that's not a reason to delete the categories. #3 the Category:Criminals and its subcategories part of BLPCRIMINAL shouldn't apply because Category:Suspected criminals and its subcats shouldn't be subcats of Category:Criminals because suspected criminals are not necessarily criminals. That's an argument for removing Category:Suspected criminals from Category:Criminals, it's not a reason to delete the category or its subcategories. #4 Being charged with a crime is a defining feature for many notable people, so they're perfectly useful/legitimate categories in our category system. Levivich (talk) 23:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per HEB and Levivich. Category:Suspected criminals should not be a subcategory of Category:Criminals since it contains a hodgepodge of categories about convicted criminals (e.g. serial killer ones) and innocent people (i.e. people acquitted of crimes). If they're convicted, they should be in Category:Criminals by crime and not this one. What these categories need is a reordering to properly sort out the convicted categories from the unconvicted ones. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    To expand on this, WP:BLPCRIMINAL is unambiguous, but the only reason why it even applies here appears to be because of a serious miscategorization issue. The policy presupposes that everyone in the "Criminal" subcategories, which should be case, but is not necessarily the case for categories such as these. Explicitly legally innocent people such as Category:People acquitted of crimes and Category:People wrongfully convicted of a crime are also included. If we just blindly apply BLPCRIMINAL, then we cannot categorize anyone acquitted or wrongfully convicted of a crime in those categories, which goes against the spirit of the policy. The obvious solution is to fix the mischaracterization and remove any entries for which the charges are not defining/relevant to notability.
    Doing a spot check of of Category:People charged with sex crimes, most cases are of dead people (no BLP issues), then cases left over after a conviction/acquittal has occurred (suboptimal), with the remainder being ones where they are charges of criminals notable for being criminals (probably fine as long as they meet notability standards as an exception to BLPCRIME). One case was of someone currently in trial with a section devoted to the charges, but who is overall not a major figure and the charges itself not being a bit story. I removed the category for not being defining, but imagine that in the case of a major, public figure and the charges themselves being a very large story, inclusion may be appropriate. Based on this, I think the BLP issues can be resolved through normal category maintenance. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Based on my comments, I've also removed Category:Suspected criminals from Category:Criminals, since that's a BLP violation. That technically resolves the WP:BLPCRIMINAL issue, though WP:BLPCRIME is still a factor, though that is not a hardline rule and only requires editors to seriously consider the issue. Here, since being charged is not the same as being convicted, I think it's probably fine for inclusion as long as entries are properly maintained. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:52, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional gnomes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Are there non-fictional gnomes? Fram (talk) 08:42, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. While I'm not sure we have the right names for the categories, separate categorization strikes me as more helpful than not. Thinking about navigating categories as a reader, I would find it more confusing than clarifying if I find articles about medieval folklore like the Dutch legends about Kabouter next to pop cultural creations like cereal mascots Snap, Crackle, and Pop. As for whether there's a distinction, while the borders can be fuzzy and are socially constructed, as with lots of things in humanities about stories of non-reality like mythology, pop mascots, literature, etc., it's not original to us as Wikipedians to note a distinction that society has made. (See for instance A Companion to Folklore (Blackwell Publishing, 2012) for discussion of both the sometimes-association and sometimes-differentiation in society between folklore and forms of fiction like literature). Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 02:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, this reminds me of the difference in fairytales between the oral tradition and ones that originated with named authors. For the authored ones, some are written for children, some to express feminism, some as adult horror stories etc etc etc. --Northernhenge (talk) 14:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Additional proposal: create Category:Legendary gnomes as also a subcategory of Category:Legendary creatures. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:02, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the comments by Marcocapelle and Hydrangeans?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:17, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Single seat helicopters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: We don't categorize aircraft by their number of seats. Arguably non-defining; if you take out additional seats for various reasons (adding equipment, long-range fuel tanks, etc.) does the helicopter count as a single-seater? The Bushranger One ping only 22:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
CommentThere is some truth to that for sure, even if most aircraft do get rated for a certain number of passengers. For FAA Ultra-light helicopters they are only allowed to carry one passenger, so we just follow the sources we don't have to make a determination or expand this to other light aircraft that have more flexibility. A75 (talk) 16:44, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, the nominator is incorrect. Helicopters are categorized this way, the FAA standard for ultra-light helicopters have to be one seat. If you see this list List of ultralight helicopters. I did not choose describe them as FAA Ultralight helicopters, because single seat helicopters have existed before this FAA regulation though they are popular now. In addition, the recent development evtols such as the Jetson One are also categorized this way, and are still baiscally helicopters even if they take a different technical approach. A75 (talk) 14:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Here, don't take my word for it. If you see Ultralight aircraft (United States), you can see that having a single-seat is important part of this standard. Thank you A75 (talk) 15:03, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For comparison, it is common for fighter aircraft, to be categorized as single seat or two seat fighter aircraft, just to round out this discussion. A75 (talk) 16:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Helicopters and aircraft are categorized this way by the FAA, yes. Wikipedia's categorization scheme does not categorize aircraft by number of seats, nor should we, as it is not a WP:DEFINING characteristic of the aircrat, especially to an outside observer. Also an "ultralight helicopter" may well be required to be a single-seat helicopter, but "single-seat helicopter" =/= "ultralight helicopter" as ultralight aircraft is a very specific classification by the FAA. Category:Ultralight helicopters would be a valid categorization alongside Category:Ultralight aircraft. Category:Single seat helicopters is not. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:48, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Having one seat is definitely a defining trait, and many single seat helicopters are noted as such. This is similar to fighter aircraft, and of course passenger airliners often mention passenger capacity. I don't have an opinion on starting another category for ultra-light helicopters right now, though we can agree that not all single-seat helicopters may be ultra-lights. A75 (talk) 21:31, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of whether or not it is consisdered WP:DEFINING, it doesn't change the fact that we don't categorise aircraft by number of seats. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 05:44, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:07, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Agapanthiinae-stub

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 20#Template:Agapanthiinae-stub

Category:Persian physicists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename and re-parent, the articles in the category are about medieval people so the category should be under Category:Medieval Iranian people and named accordingly. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:05, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy discussion
@Smasongarrison: pinging nominator at speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. SMasonGarrison 04:11, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Flexible weapons

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 17:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It is vague what "flexible" means as I initially took it to mean weapons that can be used in numerous situations, not ones that are literally bendy. And in that case, even swords can bend so they are some degree of flexible. There is no main article for this either, so I think it should not exist as-is. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:26, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:WikiProject G-Unit Records participants

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 17:23, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Project hasn't existed since 2011 after MfD. Gonnym (talk) 15:15, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 Democratic Party politicians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicates Category:Peoples Democratic Party (Nigeria) politicians. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:23, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Sport shooters from West Bengal

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 17:26, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Medieval Catholic churches by decade

[edit]
  • Option 1A: propose populating with churches built as a Catholic church
  • Option 1B: propose populating with churches which still are a Catholic church
  • Option 2: propose merging
Nominator's rationale: populate or merge?, it is obvious that these categories can be populated further when desired. The question is how, because meanwhile a substantial number of medieval churches have been converted from Catholicism to Protestantism. So should we categorize churches as Catholic when they were built as Catholic, or when they are still Catholic? I have added option 2, to upmerge, because this conveniently circumvents the previous dilemma. If there appears to be support for option 2 I will add siblings categories to the nomination ( Done). If there is more support for option 1 then the question is who is going to populate these categories because it is a huge task. I will also leave a notice at the Christianity and Catholicism WikiProject talk pages. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:PlayStation 4 Pro enhanced games

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A large number of recent games have undocumented support for this system and fall into this category, but many don't have reliable sources confirming such support, so it is impossible to have a properly representative and accurate list without breaking WP:DEFINING. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Memoryman3 (talk • contribs)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag the categories
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:08, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I have to disagree this is not defining... For the recent PS5 Pro release in Nov there was a big to do on the games that would be enhanced. That support for the games being in these categories is big in the articles for the games is not a fault of the category but editors failing to add appropriate sources when including them in these categories. Masem (t) 20:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per same rationale as Masem. Can't blame the category if editors aren't properly citing sources. --JDC808 ♫ 22:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Response to the most recent comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Dual screen phone

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 20#Category:Dual screen phone

Category:Trees of the Eastern United States

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 22#Category:Trees of the Eastern United States

Category:American social media influencers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Is this really a defining category that's distinct from American Internet celebrities? SMasonGarrison 04:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • YouTubers and TikTokers were exactly my point. We already have categories for them. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:10, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I may have written unclearly. My point was that YouTuber and social media influencer are separately notable. Michael Sugrue was a YouTuber, but to call him an "influencer" would to me seem to be misunderstanding the genre of his content (education in the history of philosophy). It's possible to be an Internet celebrity, or a noteworthy/notable person on the Internet, without being a social media influencer, making it useful to have influencers as a subcategory. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 06:01, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:35, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rape in video games

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 22#Category:Rape in video games

Category:Engineers from Jharkhand

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:24, 5 December 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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Engineers from Himachal Pradesh

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:22, 5 December 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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Delta College Mustangs football players

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:46, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These are two different names for the same category, so they should be merged.
Speedy merge request was opposed because there was no clear naming convention, so I am proposing to use the "San Joaquin Delta Mustangs" convention because it is more specific (includes location) than "Delta College Mustangs". Whatever name is chosen, they need to be merged because there are two categories for the same content. Habst (talk) 19:16, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion was started here but a consensus was never reached, but as the main category (Category:San Joaquin Delta Mustangs football) uses the specific name I would lean towards using that naming convention for all categories. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 01:36, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Other categories such as the school's baseball ones should also be merged for complete consistency if San Joaquin Delta is chosen over Delta College. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 01:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to give extra time for objections, given it was opposed at CFD. I will tag Category:San Joaquin Delta Mustangs football players; if there are no further comments in a week this can be closed as (regular) merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:29, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Fresnillo Mineros players

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These refer to the same team. For some reason, English-speakers still haven't figured out whether to call Latin sports teams "[Mascots] de [City]" or just "[City] [Mascots]." Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 00:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 12

[edit]

Category:Mangione family

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete both. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:22, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: New category:Mangione family (Maryland) has been created. Current category should be turned into a disambiguation page. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 20:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Jak and Daxter characters

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Jak and Daxter. (non-admin closure) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 16:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category only contains one article and a redirect subcategory. (Oinkers42) (talk) 13:59, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 Křivoklát

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:People from Rakovník District. (non-admin closure) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 16:02, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Sport etymologies

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 16:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We don't make categories comprised solely of redirects to sections of articles expressly created for the purpose of the category itself. If the articles are not notable enough to be actual pages, the category should not exist. Due to being against policy, it should be deleted and the redirects should be too. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:22, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Mosques 1200-1900

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:03, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: merge, up to 1900 mostly single-article categories, which is unhelpful for navigation between articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:53, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Active massively multiplayer online games

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Massively multiplayer online games. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:17, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: As the opposite Category:Inactive massively multiplayer online games, the following was created months prior to the other for non-active variant. However there are multiple reasons why I nominated this category, 1 because we do have a category for Category:Active multiplayer online games or Category:Active online games but we do have Category:Inactive online games as well as Category:Inactive multiplayer online games and Category:Inactive massively multiplayer online games. This category is also not complete; any article already in Category:Massively multiplayer online games or a subcategory of it (only including individual games) which is not also located under the inactive games could be added, but I'm asking deletion here so tell me what you think. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 04:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Persistent worlds

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 16:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEF, an old category that at this point is filled with articles for games not generally associated with persistent worlds; it's mostly likely not defining; especially when given the fact scanning for the word "persistent" in many articles gets you nothing. The fact calling some of them persistent has become subject to opinion. I am also considering several other categories related to online games deletion in both active and subsequent discussions. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:59, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Pensions in Armenia

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Pensions by country and Category:Retirement in Armenia. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: category with one eponymous article Gjs238 (talk) 01:27, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy upmerge to Pensions by country and Retirement in Armenia under WP:C2F. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:38, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Browser-based multiplayer online games

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: dual merge to Category:Browser games and Category:Multiplayer online games. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: made all the way a few years ago, I feel like this category is not wroth keeping. I do not see this specific intersection of browser platform and multiplayer online as defining, like as if it was considered more defining back in 2008? Also the parent categories that this category currently make absolutely no sense. It should be a child of just broswer and multiplayer online games, not mmorpgs and mmogs cuz that doesn't make sense. Anyway, I can't see this category being kept. Individual article should be moved to the browser games category, and if not already in a subcategory of Multiplayer online games added to that category. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:27, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


December 11

[edit]

Category:1954 disestablishments in the Maldives

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge/delete as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:45, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There were recent precedents to merge sparse disestablishment category structures rather than maintain them in parallel with establishment categories. – Fayenatic London 23:03, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 with songs by Pasek and Paul

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Propose deletion along the same lines and rationale as Category:Films with songs by the Sherman Brothers. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 22:42, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 pardoned by John Adams

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 18#Category:People pardoned by John Adams

Category:Trees of the Netherlands

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: dual merge to Category:Flora of the Netherlands and Category:Trees of Europe. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:46, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No articles in category. Clean up of a cateogy that should not have been recreated after merger to Category:Trees of Europe in 2015. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 17:57, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Cthulhu Mythos organizations

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category has only one article about a book, which shouldn't be in this category. Otherwise there is nearly nothing that makes sense to put in this category without twisting our interpretation of those articles or spamming it with redirects. Jontesta (talk) 14:17, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Doctor Who concepts

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Doctor Who. (non-admin closure) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Indiscriminate and WP:SUBJECTIVECAT with only two articles. Any article about Doctor Who could be an article about a "concept". Jontesta (talk) 14:14, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom and other voters Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 21:16, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Dune (franchise) species and races

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Dune (franchise). HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:45, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Virtually nothing to add to this category with very few articles that fit this definition. Jontesta (talk) 14:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Masters of the Universe Evil Horde

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization. This has only a few articles, and the root category has barely more. There isn't any need to randomly split the characters this way. Jontesta (talk) 14:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Skiers from West Bengal

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 13:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Kabaddi players from Uttarakhand

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 11:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 missing geocoordinate data by sea or ocean

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: not all of these categories relate to a sea or ocean (there is a Great Lakes category, Category:Great Lakes articles missing geocoordinate data). 1857a (talk) 05:52, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support renaming. Seems fine to me. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. — The Anome (talk) 07:57, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


December 10

[edit]

Populated places established before 1500

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:06, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: At present we have two underpopulated categories for populated places established before 1500. These are Category:Populated places established in 1250 and Category:Populated places established in 1495 with each category containing only one article and little or no prospects for even modest category growth. Both of these catagories are sub-categories of Category:Populated places by year of establishment which itself is part of the long-established and wider Category:Populated places by period of establishment category tree. The guidelines for this category set are as follows:

Where reliable foundation dates exist, articles describing populated places (including cities, towns and villages) should be categorised by year for 1500 and later, by decade from the 1200s to the 1490s, by century from the 10th century BC to the 13th century and by millennium for the 2nd millennium BC and earlier. Prior to 1500, where greater dating accuracy exists, articles should also be placed in the appropriate Establishments by year category. For any period in history, if reliable information does not narrow down the point of foundation beyond a given time period then articles should only be categorised by the most specific time period (i.e. decade, century or millennium) as indicated by reliable sources and without breaking the aforementioned scheme.

Prior to 1500, there are insufficient populated places being founded per annum to justify categorization by year. See WP:OCYEAR for more general guidelines pertinent to this point. Specifically "avoid creating a category tree of individual by year categories with very few members."

In the case of these two categories the two articles in question (Bottle Creek Indian Mounds and Santiago de los Caballeros) would be appropriately recategorized to Category:Populated places established in the 1250s and Category:1250 establishments and also Category:Populated places established in the 1490s and Category:1495 establishments respectively. Greenshed (talk) 22:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 films set in New York City

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 20#Category:American films set in New York City

Category:Funsoft games

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To disambiguate from Category:Funsoft GmbH games. Mika1h (talk) 20:57, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Ice exoplanets

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 17#Category:Ice exoplanets

Category:Burton family

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 17#Category:Burton family

Category:Set designers

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge and rename (non-admin closure) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:10, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: As the main article (scenic design) states, these are the same thing. The categories should be merged to match the main article. The two child categories should also be merged/renamed as proposed above. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:59, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Non-Assamese-language films with Assamese connection

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: For consistency with Category:Japan in non-Japanese culture. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:49, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more time, see above
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:College basketball venues

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NARROWCAT. There is only 1 applicable article for each of the above categories. User:Namiba 15:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Bakersfield Condors (1998–2015)

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Defunct ECHL teams. Category:Bakersfield Condors (1998–2015) players will remain in Category:ECHL players but will not be placed in Category:Defunct ECHL teams. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NARROWCAT. User:Namiba 15:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Kabaddi players from Manipur

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 14:43, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Times that 1000 Wikipedians supported something

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Times that 1000+ Wikipedians supported something. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:05, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is to clarify that this category is for any pages with >1000 signatures supporting something. See also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 20#Category:Times that 1100 Wikipedians supported something where there was some support for the rename. We can also rename to "Times that 1000 or more Wikipedians supported something" after Wikipedia:Times that 1000 or more Wikipedians supported something if people find the "+" confusing. All, except one, of the pages here are >1,100 signatures anyway. – robertsky (talk) 05:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This would create an inconsistency with Category:Times that 100 Wikipedians supported something, Category:Times that 200 Wikipedians supported something, Category:Times that 300 Wikipedians supported something, etc. Marcocapelle's reasoning fails, since the 1100 category wasn't created due to a misunderstanding, but rather because (as far as I know), nothing before the ANI open letter had been supported by 1100 Wikipedians. JJPMaster (she/they) 18:02, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: 1000+ or 1000 or more
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:25, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:1998 European Women's Handball Championship

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:1998 in women's handball. (non-admin closure) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 16:11, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Contains only the eponymous category and the squads. User:Namiba 22:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:19, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Newtown High School alumni

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There are several Newtown High Schools. The title of the article which corresponds to this category is Newtown High School (Queens). The category needs the same disambiguator. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 13:45, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. ~ Quacks Like a Duck (talk) 15:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 with songs by composer/songwriter(s)

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I'm not even sure this category is needed (which is why it's here instead of C2A), but if kept, should be renamed per MOS:SLASH and singular per WP:CAT. Gonnym (talk) 12:01, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 Bigs video games

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 17#Category:The Bigs video games


Government buildings 1300-1700

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: merge, until 1700 the tree mainly consists of single-article categories, this is unhelpful for easy navigation between related articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:31, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:CARB's ZEV Mandate

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not entirely certain what the purpose of this category is. Perhaps to categorise vehicle models that comply with some regulation(s) connected to the California Air Resources Board's ZEV program? If that is the case, then it's a WP:NONDEFINING characteristic. 1857a (talk) 02:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


December 9

[edit]

Category:Among Us

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No significant amount of articles and no existence of an article for Among Us (series). There are two subcategories, but theyre both marked as hidden and not for articles. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This nom completely fails to understand the intended purpose of categorization. It isn't only intended for articles, but to group related pages together. This category has, as the nom mentioned, two sub-categories, only one is hidden, but being hidden isn't even relevant, and two articles. I also don't understand what the argument about "Among Us (series)" is. We don't only have categories if we have a franchise page. Deleting this category will result in all of these pages and categories being disconnected and any user wishing to navigate between these pages will now have an incredibly harder time. Gonnym (talk) 22:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Hotels in Columbia, Missouri

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization. Only one article. Can be merged with other buildings in the city, and other hotels in the state. Unknown Temptation (talk) 22:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Novels set in Columbia, Missouri

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article in this category (the "in fiction" category may be too small even combined, but that's another story). Stoner, while focused on the University of Missouri, is also set at various rural locales in the state, so we do not lose anything from categorizing it as a "Novel set in Missouri". Unknown Temptation (talk) 22:05, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Eastern Orthodox saints from Belarus

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Eastern Orthodox saints from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and populate. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:55, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now or reverse merge. WP:OVERLAPCAT. All 5 people have been canonized as saints in several Eastern Orthodox churches (and some in the Catholic Church as well), and they are all from the area now known as Belarus before Belarus existed. (Note: I moved some people born before 1240 to Category:Christian saints from Kievan Rus' for chronological reasons; I did the same with Ukrainian and Russian saints earlier. These two Belarusian cats were barely populated to begin with.) NLeeuw (talk) 21:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:1990 Goodwill Games venues

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:00, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE and recent discussions. User:Namiba 18:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep setting aside that OCVENUE isn't a policy, as far as I can tell, Olympics venues have categories that haven't been deleted and aren't up for deletion. If they survive, so should the Goodwill Games venues. "Per recent discussion" is also an underwhelming rationale unless the nominator mentions which specific discussions pbp 20:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The recent discussions: Olympic football venues,Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_25#Category:NCAA_Division_I_men's_lacrosse_tournament_venues, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_18#Category:2017_FIFA_U-17_World_Cup_venues, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_18#Category:2021_FIFA_Futsal_World_Cup_venues, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_18#Category:FA_Cup_final_venues, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_15#Category:World_Baseball_Classic_venues, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_15#Category:FIFA_World_Cup_stadiums, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_22#Category:Big_12_Championship_Game_venues.--User:Namiba 15:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Lamar Cardinals football venues

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:00, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Contains just one article and 2 redirects. User:Namiba 18:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I created the subject category. Merging the subject category into the two categories noted in the proposal is acceptable to me. LUSportsFan (talk) 00:21, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Portal-Class Comics articles of NA-importance

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 21#Category:Portal-Class Comics articles of NA-importance

Category:1st century BC in Judea

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 17#Category:1st century BC in Judea

Category:English High School of Boston alumni

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The corresponding article for this category is titled The English High School. That article also says that it is "[c]ommonly referred to as Boston English." "English High School of Boston" should not be an option for the name of this category. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:27, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose renaming to Category:The English High School alumni. Whatever the title of the article, it is likely that some users would be confused by that, thinking that it refers to high schools in England, or to some other school known as "The English High School", such as the one in Lynn, Massachusetts, or the one in Providence, Rhode Island, or the one in Nişantaşı, Turkey (now renamed). A far better idea is to rename the article on the school to make its identity clear, to something such as "The English High School, Boston". I don't like the idea of renaming it to "Boston English"; certainly that would not be desirable unless it can be shown that that is by a significant margin the commonest name used for the school, and even then I wouldn't support it, because to most people that would mean the variety of the English language spoken in Boston. JBW (talk) 13:30, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on JBW's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:53, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ancient Hinduism

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Merging is not necessary, the subcategories are already in e.g. Category:8th-century BC people by religion. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Mythological Greek epic poets

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. The counter-proposal to rename did not gain traction. No prejudice against manually creating a new Category:mythological Greek poets if it can be appropriately populated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:06, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only two articles in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Skipping parent Category:Fictional oral poets as a merge target because this has been nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:14, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Mythology should not be confused with fiction as there is not the same intent regarding truthful cosmological beliefs versus fiction made for entertainment. Jontesta (talk) 16:07, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to "Category:Mythological Greek poets", and include other notable figures who would fit such a grouping, such as Orpheus and Musaeus of Athens. Being a poet is undoubtedly defining for each of these figures (more defining than being a mythological musician, except perhaps for Orpheus). Having a category covering legendary poets in Greek mythology seems entirely sensible. – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:10, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should this category be renamed/repurposed? If so, can we add enough articles to it?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:29, 1 December 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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:627 BC establishments

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, isolated single-article categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:39, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
More useful and logical to upmerge to Category:620s BC establishments. jnestorius(talk) 11:50, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's most recent comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jnestorius: Thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If That is how it is done with other year establishments represents the result of a considered discussion then please link to that discussion. If it is just a de-facto standard that evolved without consideration then I suggest starting a full discussion rather than blindly conforming to a partial consistency. I say "partial" because e.g. Category:620s BC deaths and Category:600s BC births have plenty of one-article categories. Upmerging Category:607 BC births and Category:607 BC deaths to Category:607 BC is unhelpful because you can't tell whether for a given article the category relates to the year the person was born or died (or perhaps some other important life event happened). I am making a similar argument for things other than humans. jnestorius(talk) 12:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 contortionists

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: manual merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Too small a category to be merited, with only a couple characters as members. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:28, 23 November 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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:20, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still need a response to Marcocapelle's question: should the category be merged or deleted?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Alumni of Coleg Cambria

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:48, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing no articles. Category:Alumni of Yale College, Wrexham has been made a sub-category despite the fact that Yale College Wrexham is now defunct and the two alumni in the category graduated from it when it was not part of Coleg Cambria. This extra layer of categorisation is inaccurate and makes absolutely no sense. AusLondonder (talk) 19:44, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One article and a subcategory as of relisting; is that enough to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:10, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 prosecuted under anti-homosexuality laws

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:51, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename (and purge if needed), we categorize by people by conviction, not by prosecution. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:40, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Conviction rather than prosecution is generally appropriate for crime-related categories, but here the broader scope is appropriate. Interest in the category is more likely to relate to identifying individuals who were persecuted rather than guilty. This is a subcategory of Category:Victims of human rights abuses, and those victims include individuals who were prosecuted but not convicted on the basis of sexual orientation.--Trystan (talk) 15:39, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Trystan's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Indian Paintbrush (company) films

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:47, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary disambiguation. No other category with "indian paintbrush" currently exists and even if they did, "films" exists as a natural disambiguator. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 15:57, 22 November 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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:26, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 associated with Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. A rename nomination might find consensus, and as such there is no prejudice against speedy renomination. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Vague and unnecessary. WP:ASSOCIATEDWITH concerns. For most entires, won't be WP:CATDEF meamemg (talk) 23:37, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Clay's and Dimadick's comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:25, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Buddhist cave temples

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename as nominated and add a sentence as proposed by Kingsmasher678. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename follow-up on this previous discussion and aligning with parent category name. @Kingsmasher678 and Johnbod: pinging contributors to previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support rename, but oppose this target. Something to clarify that these are manmade would be nice, because these features are almost exclusively rock-cut architecture not caves. In fact, I think I only saw one natural cave in the whole bunch when I was sorting them by state. That was the original idea I had when I named to cats, though it missed the mark!
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 17:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Best solution so far. You can't always tell whether a large excavation began as a natural cave or not. Johnbod (talk) 23:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am trying to go through the cave categories right now and these are practically the only group of human structures called caves in the entire tree. It's also kind of irrelevant if it started natural, because it sure isn't now, and would therefore be rock-cut.
    Kingsmasher678 (talk) 01:29, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I can see you find it annoying that the standard term is caves, but it just is. The forms found in India typically fall into two main types, often both represented at large sites like the Ajanta Caves, viharas, the most numerous, which can't be called temples, and chaityas, which generally can. So "caves" is used as a group term. Johnbod (talk) 02:30, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I’m not arguing for the current names, I’m arguing that they should be clarified to be rock cut or at least indicated that they aren’t natural, because in the caves tree, nearly everything is natural. It’s an important distinction. I mean, we literally have an article about the correct term. I’m not trying to call them temples, as I have been told that isn’t right. Sorry if there was some confusion.
    Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, both of those article you linked called the structures temple, just so you know.
    Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:36, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:46, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename target still needs sorting out.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kingsmasher678, Marcocapelle, and Johnbod: See above relisting comment. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about we change to the proposed names, but add a sentence on the categories page that clarify that most of the structures are not natural. After that, create subcategories of the "Caves of India" tree that discern between the reginal use of "cave" to describe rock-cut sites, and the traditional sense. Would this work for everyone? Kingsmasher678 (talk) 01:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As a reader and user, I would appreciate that kind of clarification. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 12:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Biodiversity Heritage Library Enthusiasts

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:47, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OC/U#irrelevant likes. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:08, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I somewhat disagree, as the Biodiversity Library is quite a resource for Wikipedia/Wikimedia commons, so relevant to to encyclopedia-building. TiagoLubiana (talk) 10:55, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problems is the term "enthusiasts". I wouldn't have nominated Category:Wikipedians who use the Biodiversity Library for deletion as one example, but I'm not seeing what the collaborative value of grouping users who describe themselves as "enthusiasts" is. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on TiagoLubiana's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Scientists from Plano, Texas

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:02, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with two entries. Also upmerge entries to Scientists from Texas, Lost in Quebec (talk) 19:27, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's and Flurrious's comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:44, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is six enough to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 executed by the United States federal government by lethal injection

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:02, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary category that duplicates Category:21st-century executions by the United States federal government. All 16 entries are in that category and vice versa. Lost in Quebec (talk) 22:59, 21 November 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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:41, 1 December 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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lost in Quebec: Thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:13th-century French physicists

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:French physicists and Category:13th-century French scientists. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:02, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Isolated category, upmerge for now. SMasonGarrison 01:47, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


December 8

[edit]

Category:Map series of France

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge Timrollpickering (talk) 12:42, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one page in here, which isn't helpful for navigation SMasonGarrison 20:13, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Viruses described in 1892

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: dual merge Timrollpickering (talk) 10:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Mostly 1-article categories (only 1933 & 1972 contain 2 articles), per suggestion by Marcocapelle @ Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Category:Human viruses by year of formal description.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  15:34, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Map series of Canada

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge Timrollpickering (talk) 12:43, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge for now. There is only one page in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. SMasonGarrison 15:29, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Modern roman religion

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: speedy delete. C1 speedy deleted. The Bushranger One ping only 09:40, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category overlaps heavily with a much other category. I've already warned the category creator to slow down. They're extremely new. SMasonGarrison 14:52, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Aired episodes tracking categories

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename Timrollpickering (talk) 12:47, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, "template" is redundant. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:10, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Travelers

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep Category:Fictional travelers. Containerize Category:Travelers and Category:Female travelers. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:57, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It is tough to understand how this could possibly be defining. Most everyone is a traveler at some point, so it's simply too vague to function as a category. Furthermore, many of the categories herein make no sense. Migrants and stowaways are not necessarily travelers by nature, but are taking a potentially one-time journey. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 02:29, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that we should containerize the Category:Travelers and Category:Female travelers, per marco. I'm neutral on the rest. SMasonGarrison 15:09, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose merging. Humans haven't always been as mobile as they are in the present. "Traveler" (or one of its subcategories, rather) is precisely the kind of category that I'd expect for articles like Ibn Battuta or Marco Polo (and, indeed, they are included in travel writer categories that are subcategories of the tree created by the traveler category). I would support containerizing them, except then what would be category for non-biography articles like list of travelers (which is definitely about travelers) or Women and the Grand Tour (which is definitely about female travel)? Whatever happens, though, these categories should not be simply merged to the parent "by behavior" categories. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 12:26, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Ancient and early medieval military alliances

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge Timrollpickering (talk) 12:43, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, isolated and poorly populated categories, not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:51, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Recreational weapons

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Delete Timrollpickering (talk) 12:49, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Even standard weapons can be used for recreational (i.e. hunting) purposes, making what constitutes a "recreational" weapon vague at best. I suggest deleting it, with the exception of Category:Toy weapons which should be upmerged. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Pejorative terms for in-group non-members

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge to Category:Pejorative terms for people Timrollpickering (talk) 12:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Too long and clunky, this gets the point across more concisely. Qualiesin (talk) 01:05, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or rename? I am not seeing explicit opposition to the rename if there is no consensus to merge, given Marcocapelle sees both names as equally unhelpful. Feel free to correct me, however!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:10, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle: See above relisting comment; I want to make sure I understand your opinion. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Mayors of Barcelona City Council

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename Timrollpickering (talk) 12:48, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Mayors in Spain are members of the city council, but at least the WP:COMMONNAME of the job is "Mayor of Barcelona", just like all other Mayor categories for Spain, at least. Couple of press sources, many more [2] [3]. Official website in English. [4]. An analogy to the current title would be "prime minister of the British House of Commons"; the prime minister sits in the HoC yes, but that is far from the most common title. Unknown Temptation (talk) 20:41, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Unknown Temptation I concur. Your proposal makes a lot of sense. There is no other use of 'Mayor of Barcelona' as a title or for anything else for that matter. Plus, the Spanish and Catalan categories for this are both 'Alcaldes de Barcelona', a word-for-word translation of what you've proposed. Along the lines of PM of the British HoC, imagine if people called Charles III by his full formal title... Charles the Third, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories, King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. It's excessive. Montezuma69 (talk) 03:47, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Was not tagged. I will do so.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Reality by type

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge Timrollpickering (talk) 12:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Most of these aren't really a type of reality, but a way of interpreting or adding onto reality. The title being misleading as it is, it's best to simply merge them back to the parent category. Alternatively, this category may be deleted instead as simply WP:SHAREDNAME without relation to the scientific or philosophical concept of reality. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:56, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:English female characters in drama television series

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge Timrollpickering (talk) 12:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: As well as being unneeded differenciations, some have very few entries and, as most television characters who have Wikipedia articles originate from dramas, it seems redundant to split these. FishLoveHam (talk) 20:47, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

15 to 21 days old

[edit]

December 7

[edit]

Category:Category-Class articles

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename all as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:07, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: In line with Category:FM-Class pages which was renamed recently (see CfD discussion), all of these not articles, so it is more logical to rename to "pages". — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:32, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Draft class might be the only one that can be considered articles, but I agree that this is better as a whole. Gonnym (talk) 09:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  14:44, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Streets in Somalia

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 06:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: category contains roads not streets. TSventon (talk) 19:26, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 who have sacrificed their lives to save others

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 16#Category:People who have sacrificed their lives to save others

Category:Template:Template category with no topic or description

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename Timrollpickering (talk) 20:06, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, I am presuming this should be a subcategory of Category:Wikipedia template categories and that it should be named accordingly. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:31, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support rename. Thanks for finding this! SMasonGarrison 16:45, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Deaths from hypertension

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 06:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, hypertension is a risk factor but not a cause of death. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Deaths from cardiovascular disease

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 14#Category:Deaths from cardiovascular disease

Decades in history

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 14#Decades in history

Medieval Christianity by decade

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: manual merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:54, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: manually merge, redundant category layer, the vast amount of these categories only contains a churches subcategory. In the merging process the churches subcategories can be ignored because they are already in the trees of the targets. Only the articles directly in these categories need to be moved. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Man-eaters of India

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename to Category:Man-eating animals in India Timrollpickering (talk) 20:13, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: procedural nomination. At WP:CFDS there was consensus to change to "man-eating animals" but the discussion stranded on "of India" versus "in India". Marcocapelle (talk) 08:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy discussion
@Armbrust, Zxcvbnm, The Bushranger, and Mxnstrixxx: pinging contributors to speedy discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:14, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Stone (band) albums

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 06:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I just moved Stone (band) to Stone (Finnish band) to disambiguate from Stone (British band). Since this was a bold move, WP:C2D would not apply. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Intersex and medicine

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 14#Category:Intersex and medicine

Category:Works for prepared piano

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: speedy rename. charlotte 👸🎄 21:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I would like to keep it in line with categories of the same type (e.g., see the subcategories of Category:Compositions for piano). Why? I Ask (talk) 00:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy rename as WP:C2C. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


December 6

[edit]

Publicity photographs

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Publicity photographs

Category:Farmers from Telangana

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 19:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Soccer clubs in Burlington, Ontario

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Does not help navigation. User:Namiba 19:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Template:Metadata Population

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Population data templates. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename for better clarification what the category is about, it is also WP:C2Cish. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Population data templates. This isn't metadata, this is just plain data. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Ukrainian campaigns

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: rename, less ambiguous names and in line with recent (bold) renaming of articles. If this is opposed, the article renames should be reverted. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
copy of speedy discussion
@Family27390 and Armbrust: pinging contributors to speedy discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 associated with apartheid

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: manual merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:35, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCASSOC. It is duplicative and hinders navigation. User:Namiba 16:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Ancient international relations

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Berbers by nationality

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: More consistent with others e.g. within Category:Egyptian people by descent, and with subcats by descent (People of Moroccan-Berber descent) or occupation (Moroccan Berber politicians). – Fayenatic London 12:26, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:1st-century BC natural events

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Mountain climbers from Andhra Pradesh

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Also nominating for merge Category:Mountain climbers from Delhi to Category:Sportspeople from Delhi

All categories with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 11:36, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Years AD by century

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:Years AD by century

Category:Foreign policy strategies in the Islamic Republic of Iran

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Strangely named category. It could also be merged to Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran SMasonGarrison 05:18, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Control theory publications

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Control engineering. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: underpopulated category. upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 04:30, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Selective merge. People by association isn't typically defining. SMasonGarrison 03:28, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 people from Iran during the Islamic Republic

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Or something to that effect SMasonGarrison 03:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Template:History of Islam

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:History of Islam templates. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: If not merged, it needs to be renamed. The category creator keeps creating categories with this undesired naming convention. SMasonGarrison 03:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Conspiracist media

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:29, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: this category contains mainstream medias and generally only concentrated in certain countries Coddlebean (talk) 02:43, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Writers by populated place in Northumberland

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. This redundant category isn't needed for navigation. SMasonGarrison 02:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


December 5

[edit]

Category:Jew’s Harps of Nepal

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT. This category only contains one article (Binayo) which was moved here from Category:Nepalese musical instruments. 1857a (talk) 21:10, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the 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 by country

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only 1-3 subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Delta College Mustangs football players

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:Delta College Mustangs football players


Category:Soviet Nonconformist Art

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: per catmain Soviet nonconformist art. --Altenmann >talk 18:19, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 Muslim activists for Palestinian solidarity

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:35, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge, not a defining intersection. User:Namiba 17:30, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Songs in Egyptian dialect (Masry) of Arabic

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge both to Category:Songs in Arabic. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:36, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Same wording used at Category:Songs in Moroccan Arabic (Darija), as the language is commonly known in English as “Egyptian Arabic”, not “Egyptian dialect of Arabic”. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 15:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Rape in video games

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:Rape in video games

Category:Walter Lantz Productions cartoons and characters

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: split as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These belong on two separate category trees. The other categories structured this way should also be split accordingly. (Oinkers42) (talk) 13:57, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Wish characters

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category only has two articles, can be better contained under its parent. Should also be merged to Category:Walt Disney Animation Studios characters. (Oinkers42) (talk) 13:50, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Speakers of the Landtag of Liechtenstein

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:COMMONAME, the official title of the role is president of the Landtag of Liechtenstein, and is what is used within Liechtenstein and elsewhere on wiki. TheBritinator (talk) 12:16, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Engineers from Jharkhand

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:Engineers from Jharkhand

Category:Engineers from Himachal Pradesh

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:Engineers from Himachal Pradesh

Category:American social media influencers

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:American social media influencers

Category:Yukol family

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: More correct spelling. While some individual members of the family use the spelling Yukol, Yugala is the original and preferred romanisation used for the entire family, after that of its progenitor Prince Yugala Dighambara. See Jeffrey Finestone's The Royal Family of Thailand, which is the definitive source on the Thai Royal Family and its cadet houses.[5] Paul_012 (talk) 02:58, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lean rename. My only hesitation is that there's not a page about this family for us to add this sourcing/discussion to. SMasonGarrison 16:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


December 4

[edit]

Category:Centrolepidaceae

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:37, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: According to APG IV Freely accessible, Centrolepidaceae is now included in Restionaceae. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:29, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Causinae

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:37, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The category was apparently depopulated a while ago, leaving only the eponymous redirect Causinae. According to Open Tree of Life and A nesting of vipers: Phylogeny and historical biogeography of the Viperidae (Squamata: Serpentes) Freely accessible, and as described at Causus § Taxonomy, Causus is now placed within Viperinae, making Causinae a junior subjective synonym of Viperinae. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Oriental Orthodox congregations established in the 4th century

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:37, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, anachronistic category, the Oriental Orthodox Churches did not exist yet in the 4th century. The three articles are already in Category:Christian monasteries established in the 4th century, there is no need to merge somewhere. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:25, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Trees of the Netherlands

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 11#Category:Trees of the Netherlands

Category:Trees of the Eastern United States

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:Trees of the Eastern United States

Category:File-Class articles

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:File-Class pages. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:39, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: For the same reason FM-Class articles was renamed to FM-Class pages here, in which also suggested this name. This nomination includes all sub-pages. Gonnym (talk) 17:33, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:People by paranormal abilities

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:People by claimed paranormal ability. Thank you to all participants for a very civil discussion and working towards compromise :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:00, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The current title of this category suggests the abilities are real. Given that these abilities have never been scientifically proven, it should specify they are alleged. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:14, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Bushranger's point?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:01, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment The people claiming paranormal abilities have the burden to prove they possess them in a scientific lab setting. If they cannot, then I don't believe saying "purported" or "claimed" is POV. If there was even a smidgen of scientific confirmation, then perhaps it would be. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:28, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Zxcvbnm's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:24, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think Pppery's proposal is the best so far. PrinceTortoise (he/him • poke • inspect) 07:55, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Administrator election

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to successful/unsuccessful administrator election candidates. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 (T·C) 13:02, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: or "administrator election candidacies"? charlotte 👸♥ 17:17, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Hunting in video games

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: purge of article contents and merge the subcategories to Category:Hunting video games. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:36, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This seems to have missed the broad renaming of similar categories. It should be renamed to be more defining than it is now. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Stinkers Bad Movie Award winning films

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCAWARD --woodensuperman 12:32, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Dual screen phone

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:Dual screen phone

Category:Jon Bon Jovi

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. (non-admin closure) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:29, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEPON. The "Works by" tree is sufficient here. --woodensuperman 11:10, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Lenny Kravitz

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:44, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEPON. The "Works by" tree is sufficient here. --woodensuperman 11:05, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 Glyndon, Minnesota

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:44, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:33, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:45, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Seems to be WP:SHAREDNAME, defense itself is a disambiguation page and not an article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:02, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Infrastructure and Transport infrastructure 1400-1700

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 (T·C) 12:47, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, until 1700 the tree consists largely of single-article categories, this is unhelpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:24, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 Comics film characters

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: purge. No consensus to convert to a container category. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:07, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category's description is for "Film characters based on Marvel Comics", although in recent months, it has become populated by an absurd amount of articles for the comic characters themselves, with many of those being for characters only RECENTLY being featured in some mass media. This cat has primarily operated as a holding for the three current subcats which are actually for film adaptations of these characters. This cat is repeatedly readded to articles on the comics versions and I am requesting full deletion as the current subcats handle all relevant media adaptations in film, or, if that does not pass, then I would request this cat to be purged and converted into a formal holding cat. Trailblazer101 (talk) 07:10, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comment: I would also like to note that the creator of this cat, User:Dietic, has a history of making similar categories as this one for Marvel adaptation characters that were overcategorized on the comics articles and were subsequently deleted in the past few years, many of which may be viewed via their talk page. Trailblazer101 (talk) 07:14, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Clear consensus for a change; should it be purged or deleted?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:43, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Purge: Agree that the cat should be limited to articles about the characters from the films specifically, but that that's a perfectly fine scope to maintain and the category retains value so long as that scope is maintained. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 07:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The description is more specific than its title, so just change the description or the title? Tag the users populating it. --MikutoH talk! 03:27, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also containerize?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same as HouseBlaster above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 06:30, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I already expressed support for deletion above. We already have Category:Marvel Cinematic Universe characters and this duplicates that with a more confusing name. Jontesta (talk) 13:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Armories (military)

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:49, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: See WP:OVERLAPCAT. They share the same article overall, with only naming differences. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:51, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 06:28, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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


Category:Cetacean attacks

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories each. This is follow-up on this earlier discussion, @Zxcvbnm and Jontesta: pinging contributors to that discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:06, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Caves of Madeira

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: dual merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:05, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not a large enough cat to improve navigation. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 04:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 Iraq to Morocco

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category, upmerge for now. SMasonGarrison 03:49, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:AEW aircraft

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 10:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These are a subset of Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft, mostly early (but not all), and there is siginifcant overlap. The WP:COMMONNAME for this type of aircraft is 'AWACS'. The Bushranger One ping only 23:23, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The basic claim here is untrue. AWACS aircraft are a subset of AEW aircraft, not the other way around. Only the latest generations (from the '60s onwards, maybe the Lockheed EC-121 Warning Star as the first) and the largest aircraft also had an AWACS capability. The earlier ones, and still the smaller ones, or the tactical theatre aircraft were limited to AEW only.
We could merge all to AEW. That would be valid and correct. However I would oppose the merge in either direction, as the two types are distinct, defining and more useful when kept separate. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:34, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Doing the same merge, but to a worse name, is hardly any better.
The point here is that there are two categories, because AEW aircraft didn't carry the extra capability of being AWACS aircraft. So they don't belong in any category implying that they do. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:40, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then Category:AEW aircraft needs to be scanned, because there's several types in there that I'm pretty sure I recognize as AWACS. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:08, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Such as? Firstly that's an irrelevance for this question (whatever changes to membership are needed, then just change them). Secondly that's a vague handwave, unless you can cite which are the issue. Thirdly, thinking that Nimrod AEW3 was an AWACS aircraft was one of the most expensive mistakes of the British aircraft industry! Andy Dingley (talk) 12:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:AWACS aircraft, but there is no current consensus to do anything in particular. Additional comments are welcome!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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


Category:Zimbabwe radio station stubs

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:49, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated stub category. As always, stub categories are not free for just any user to create on a whim for any random topic -- the minimum size requirement for a stub category is 60 articles, and much short of that a stub template should just upfile pages into a parent category. But there are only 16 articles here, with no prospect of finding 44 more as the parent Category:Radio stations in Zimbabwe only has three pages in it that aren't duplicated here.
The template is fine, as it can upfile pages in the parents, but we would need to have a lot more articles about radio stations in Zimbabwe than we've got before a dedicated stub category was justifiable. Bearcat (talk) 02:45, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


December 3

[edit]

Category:Viking Age slave trade

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:25, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename to something more general, it was a trade chain from eastern Europe to among others Al-Andalus, the Vikings had something to do with it, but did not dominate the whole chain. The issue is not that Vikings were around in this period, the issue is that most Slavs weren't Christianized yet and hence were accepted as subjects of slave trade. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:48, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There seem to be a misunderstanding here. This category is meant to be used for the slave trade which was managed by the vikings specifically, not just slave trade taking place in Europe during the middle ages. That would be too wide an issue: there is also for example the Prague slave trade, the Venetian slave trade, etc.
The vikings did not dominate the trade in slaves from Western Europe to al-Andalus. They did participate in it, certainly, but they did not dominate it.
They did, however, certainly dominate the trade in slaves from Europe to the Middle East via Eastern Europe/"Russia". The slave trade played a major part for viking economy, and the vikings played a major part as a supplyer for the trade in European slaves to the Abbasid Caliphate via Russia.
The category is meant to be used only for the slave trade of the vikings. It could be a subcategory of a future middle ages slave trade of course. --Aciram (talk) 22:21, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is not just the element of supply, there is also a further chain and a demand side. Via Prague the slaves went to al-Andalus and via Bukhara there were various other sources of slave supply than Vikings too. Attributing everything to the Vikings skews the facts. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:41, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's most recent comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:09, 25 November 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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I agree with Marco that the category should be broadened, because "dominate the trade" is really too fuzzy of a feature. SMasonGarrison 21:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How would anyone be able to decide if one party dominates a slave trade or not? For example, the Atlantic slave trade was a collaboration between Europeans and African slave traders. Yet we still have categories such as "French slave trade".
There is a point in illustrating the slave trade that was supplied through the slave raiding of the vikings.--Aciram (talk) 15:01, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The alternative name Medieval slave trade, is too broad a term to be usefull. The Middle ages was many centuries long and included a great deal many different slave trades which was not always connected to each other. For example, the Venetian slave trade has its own category and would have to be a sub category.--Aciram (talk) 15:01, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Non-Assamese-language films with Assamese connection

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Category:Non-Assamese-language films with Assamese connection

Category:PlayStation 4 Pro enhanced games

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:PlayStation 4 Pro enhanced games

Category:Redirects of fictional people by nationality

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:00, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This, all of its sub-categories and other sibling categories which I can't be bothered to tag as the editor keeps creating more and more of these as I write this. These are pointless category intersections. A redirect should already be tagged with redirect categories which places it in the relevant redirect categories. If it also needs to be in content categories it could be added there. This tree, if left to exist, will duplicate a massive amount of categories for no real reason. Gonnym (talk) 18:06, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I had to create them because Kung Fu Man thinks that redirects should not be added to categories. Like, these redirects were created for characters that do not their own articles. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 18:08, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see anything at Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects that prohibits adding content related redirects (a television character redirect) to relevant content categories. That pages also gives an example of placing Wile E. Coyote in Category:Fictional coyotes. If that guideline page wanted to explicitly prohibit adding these pages to content pages, it should have said that. Gonnym (talk) 18:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
KungFuMan's explanation is pretty confusing. I understand why he did remove them but does not make any sense if any characters does not had their own articles. Like, look how he removed categories in one of the redirects Engineer (Team Fortress 2). Like if he wants to avoid category bloat, then he should have ask if the redirects should be moved to separate categories. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 18:53, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just an update, there are no rules in adding category. We could still delete them and add new redirect to lists if it turns out well. Delete (right away) just for now. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 20:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SpinnerLaserzthe2nd, are you okay with deleting all of the subcategories? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I tried everything with the redirects but little to no luck. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 03:45, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:People by criminal charge

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:People by criminal charge

Category:Video games in East Asia

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: First of all, shouldn't the category name be "Video gaming in East Asia" in consistency with similarly-named categories? Also, this is the only category for video gaming in a region or continent. It contains two distinct articles at the moment though that are defining. If not delete, then rename. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 16:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 political parties in the Netherlands

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Right now, 3 out of the 6 articles are not part of the Netherlands, but are part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. So it should be renamed. Another option is to delete the category altogether, because they are not really related and can be found through Category:Politics of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (of which this category should be a direct child if kept). Dajasj (talk) 09:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Set designers

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Category:Set designers

Category:Yacht clubs in the United States

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. Category:Sailing clubs in the United States is already a redirect back to Category:Yacht clubs in the United States, so the consensus in this discussion (which is that there should be a single category and it should be called Category:Yacht clubs in the United States) is that the status quo (at least at the time of the discussion close) should remain. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:21, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, for consistency with most of its subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:35, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison, Armbrust, and Yachty4000: pinging contributors to an opposed speedy proposal the other way around. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:38, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I'm fine with either direction, my goal is consistency. SMasonGarrison 13:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Times that 1000 Wikipedians supported something

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Category:Times that 1000 Wikipedians supported something


December 2

[edit]

Category:Miss Intercontinental

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 08:11, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per deletion of List of Miss Intercontinental titleholders. Previously deleted but the consensus was sufficiently weak than I'm not willing to press the G4 button, so here we go. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:John Brown sites

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: manual merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCASSOC. Pruning to remove sites (such as Springdale, Iowa) which are not directly related to Brown is needed as well. User:Namiba 23:05, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thank you for the correction.--User:Namiba 23:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:1998 European Women's Handball Championship

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Category:1998 European Women's Handball Championship


Category:Buildings and structures in Kara, Togo

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Contains only two articles and cannot be populated further. User:Namiba 21:14, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, why can it not be populated further? —2A02:1811:1C81:2900:966:8153:865D:6782 (talk) 21:21, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because there are no other articles about buildings and structures in Kara, Togo which I could find. If there are more, please populate it.--User:Namiba 22:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Action horror video games

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 08:12, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is more dependent on subcategories than articles, and only has one article at the moment, being Kenseiden. I don't see action horror video game being a true legitimate genre, and many horror games already consider to fall under the action games genre anyway. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 17:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Defunct National Premier Soccer League stadiums

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 08:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The NPSL is a low-level soccer league and none of these stadiums are defined by hosting it. User:Namiba 17:29, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:21st-century members of the Maine Legislature

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Withdrawn. The Bushranger One ping only 00:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Candidates are not elected to the Maine Legislature; they are elected to either the Maine House of Representatives or the Maine Senate. All of those in this category were elected to the House. User:Namiba 17:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think those are useful to keep. The issue is that User:Jevansen (tagging so they can respond) created a wide number of categories today which are inconsistent. Some are for specific bodies, i.e. Category:21st-century members of the Iowa General Assembly and some for legislatures as a whole. This may need to be a wider discussion.--User:Namiba 20:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for the notification. All the subcats in Category:21st-century American legislators are for the bicameral legislatures of the state governments, encompassing members of both houses. I didn't think the naming structure ("members") would be an issue given that the parent is Category:Members of bicameral legislatures of country subdivisions. We also have articles presented in the same way eg Members of the California State Legislature (should probably be a list). At any rate, I'm happy to further diffuse each by the individual house if that is preferred? Jevansen (talk) 20:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with withdrawing this for now, though I do think dividing them on a House/Senate level is preferred for bicameral legislatures.--User:Namiba 15:18, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is something I can do. Just let me give it a bit of time before beginning the task as I've already upset at least one user due to watchlist overload. Jevansen (talk) 23:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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-Class Comics articles of NA-importance

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant to Category:Category-Class Comics articles Fram (talk) 15:44, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 gnomes

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:Fictional gnomes

Category:Single seat helicopters

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 13#Category:Single seat helicopters

Category:Novels about adultery

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Novels about infidelity. (non-admin closure) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 16:05, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This would mirror Category:Films about infidelity, and allows for the inclusion of novels on the theme that are about infidelity outside of marriage. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 17:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 05:42, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:National Artists (Thailand). The Bushranger One ping only 09:43, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I previously raised objection to the decapitalisation of the category title at WT:CFD, though the reversion process seems to have fallen through the cracks. Anyway, as I mentioned in that discussion, the National Artist title is an award, and directly using the award title for the category does feel a bit unnatural. To compare, we don't refer to Academy Award "Best Actors", but "Best Actor winners". Renaming the category as proposed would better reflect the nature of the title, i.e. its being an award, not a job. Paul_012 (talk) 16:51, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I think the proposed form matches the general preference at CfD to follow the article title, though I personally dislike parenthesis in category titles when natural disambiguation is possible. So I'll also list Category:National Artist of Thailand awardees, Category:National Artist awardees of Thailand, Category:Thai National Artist awardees, and Category:Thailand National Artist awardees as alternative suggestions. --Paul_012 (talk) 16:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus favors a rename, though no clear consensus on what the new name should be. In particular, thoughts on Josh's comment (which would imply lowercase-a "National artist")?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:21, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • (Reply to relisting comment) I think there's agreement on Category:National Artist (Thailand) awardees. Hey man im josh's comment was in favour of lower-case national artists if the term is in plural, but the original proposal is not affected by this. --Paul_012 (talk) 23:57, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose regarding Category:National Artist (Thailand) awardees since it's not an ordinary award (or even an ordinary honorary award), it's an honorary title given by the state (see National Artist or similar honorary titles like People's Artist and Honored Artist/Merited Artist). If we look at the current category names for this kind of title (Category:People's_Artists, Category:Honored Artists, and Category:Merited Artists, which also would be affected by this discussion, I believe), most have the form "... Artists of country" (for many the article title matches that but not for all), a few have the lower-case variant of that ("... artists of country"), and one has the form "Recipients of the title of Merited Artist of country". If we want to avoid the plural, I would support something along the lines of the last form ("Recipients of the title of x", where x can match the article title); "awardees" is very uncommon in general (basically not used atm, see search) and seems like a particularly odd choice for recipients of a title.
    If we want to have something closer to the current naming scheme (i.e. a plural form), I think the question is whether honorary titles fall under "Positions, offices, and occupational titles". I could not find a answer in discussions on that (I have seen some discussion about the (honorary) title of "Fellow", where it was argued that this could be interpreted as a position within a society, but I think that applies to this current discussion not as much), but it seems to me like all the examples in WP:JOBTITLES are very much occupation related (and that this was the intent behind this guideline), which the honors discussed here are clearly not. If we believe that honorary titles fall under WP:JOBTITLES, then arguments based on the specificity of the title would be irrelevant, since that is is not a reason to capitalize it per WP:JOBTITLES. Similarly, the argument that "National Artist" is a proper noun and that this leads to the plural being a proper noun (and capitalized) as well wouldn't work since there seems to be a consensus that such plural forms of titles are, in fact, not proper nouns and always capitalized (see Talk:List of presidents of the United States/Archive 13#Requested move 27 July 2019), and honestly, if "Presidents of the United States" is not considered a proper noun, then "National Artists" definitely isn't either. So, if we decide that WP:JOBTITLES does indeed apply to honorary titles, I think the lower-case plural is a given. If we decide that honorary titles do not fall under "Positions, offices, and occupational titles", then we still have MOS:PEOPLETITLES as a guideline, which doesn't say anything about plurals (although something is implied by an individual's name). I think the proper nouns argument would still lead to lower-case plural, but the consensus and arguments were specifically in reference to WP:JOBTITLES, so who knows. Felida97 (talk) 03:13, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know this is already too long, but I want to note a more general consideration (and potential argument for a capitalized plural despite MOS:JOBTITLES) that I came across when thinking about this discussion, and that is the fact that categories are obv inherently different from articles in various ways (and have a kind of special/particular function), and it may be debatable to what extent an article guideline like WP:JOBTITLES (or style guidelines, such as the Chicago Manual of Style, that are frequently referenced in style discussions) should apply to categories or category names (I'm not sure whether there is a nice analog equivalent for those). Or are categories perhaps so distinct/special in their structure/purpose that one could argue to have different rules for certain aspects? One aspect where this is already the case is that article titles generally should be singular in form (see WP:SINGULAR), whereas names of set categories are generally plural, which totally makes sense because of the different structure and function compared with articles. But, as I said, this is more general consideration. Felida97 (talk) 03:16, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Awardees is just what I came up with off the top of my head, so I'm open to other suggestions. But Category:Recipients of the title of National Artist of Thailand does seem rather unwieldy. RevelationDirect and Hey man im josh, what do you think? --Paul_012 (talk) 05:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with either of those. I acknowledge I could be wrong about "Artists", but it does seem that pluralizing the title would result in MOS:JOBTITLES applying, so whatever is done to get around that I'm fine with. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's true (although in this instance it would be Category:Recipients of the title of National Artist (Thailand) to match the article title, right? [side note: I noticed that some of these titles have the "of country" part in the official title, but the Thailand one does not afaict, so the article title National Artist (Thailand) is not necessarily wrong and matching it was supported by all, I think]). My suggestion is also not that common atm (four cats), but that is because almost all category names for this kind of honor use the plural (here's another similar title: Category:Hero (title); same for Category:Honorary titles of the United Kingdom, Category:Honorary titles of Russia or Category:Honorary titles of the Holy See), and afaics, "Recipients of the title of..." is the most common (and only non-plural) alternative (and "Recipients of ..." seems to be common for other official state honors). Given the implications for quite a few categories and since our current direction here goes so clearly against the overwhelming majority of names, this honorary-titles-JOBTITLES-plural-capitalization issue probably should be discussed under wider participation to settle it (especially since a good portion of those plural names is currently wrong and should be corrected anyway, no matter what the correct form is), right? Felida97 (talk) 02:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Felida97's latest comment (suggesting Category:Recipients of the title of National Artist (Thailand))?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:20, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It's not typical to extend a discussion for so long, but I think this is the situation to do it. Would like to see if there's more agreement on a certain name.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 05:36, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Origin stories

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 16#Category:Origin stories

Category:Wikipedia Medcab category cases

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. SilverLocust 💬 01:17, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not even sure what this category is doing. The word "category" does not appear in its only member, Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-05-27 Anti-Canadianism. That page is already in Category:Wikipedia Medcab closed cases, so we can delete this category. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:01, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Plant cognition

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep and no rename (non-admin closure) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 16:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per the sourcing at plant cognition all of the WP:RS use the term "plant intelligence", not plant cognition. The main article also needs to renamed to plant intelligence but I believe this category should also be changed. Psychologist Guy (talk) 02:52, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


December 1

[edit]

Category:People sentenced to death

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. A specific proposal to containerize might find consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This would appear to fail WP:NONDEF, as being sentenced to death is potentially temporary and can be rescinded or rendered moot. It is not a "defining trait" like having been executed is. This deletion would also include all subcategories of "People sentenced to death" besides Category:Executed people, Category:Fictional executed characters and Category:Execution survivors. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:35, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Containerize?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:37, 23 November 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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Fictional outlaws. No prejudice against further renaming. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category didn't exist until recently, it's rather duplicative with the merge target and can easily be construed as the exact same thing. Per WP:OVERLAPCAT, they should be merged back. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 06:15, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Fictional outlaws.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:33, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Mythological Greek epic poets

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:Mythological Greek epic poets

Category:California pioneers

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: containerize. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: selectively merge, the real pioneers are already in Category:People of the Californias and Category:People of Alta California and it is an arbitrary choice to expand the pioneer period to the 1870s. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But there are a lot of American pioneer categories. What about converting this into a container category to facilitate navigation? SMasonGarrison 23:33, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 06:16, 23 November 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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison: Thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still think containerizing Category:California pioneers is a better solution than deleting/merging. I think that there are cases were people are defined as being California pioneers. SMasonGarrison 21:52, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 contortionists

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:Fictional contortionists

Category:Private hospitals in Greece

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: dual merge. The sibling categories can be nominated separately; they were not tagged. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 02:39, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Savvyjack23, Perhaps you can find them to support your strongly oppose position. LibStar (talk) 23:22, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can it be populated?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:14, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. Two pages is not sufficient to justify keeping a category. SMasonGarrison 21:53, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Alumni of Coleg Cambria

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:Alumni of Coleg Cambria

Category:Caves of Xinjiang

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename Category:Caves of Xinjiang to Category:Buddhist caves in Xinjiang and Category:Chinese Buddhist grottoes to Category:Buddhist grottoes in China. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These are all artificial, and thus not true caves. This is a more accurate description. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:38, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should actually be renamed to Category:Buddhist grottoes in Xinjiang Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename target? There are three possibilities floating around.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:12, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support consistency, but away from the corny "grotto", which the best RS don't use, though Chinese tourist material does. "Grotto" has become fixed as the word for small excavations or erections in Western Catholicism, and English landscape gardening etc (following the Italian, each for different reasons), but all the Buddhist ones in Category:Grottoes should go to "caves". Johnbod (talk) 03:59, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Johnbod's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:10, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:627 BC establishments

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:627 BC establishments

Category:Fictional Belgian people

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The current name gives the impression that these are characters with an in-universe nationality or citizenship. Most of them have no defined nationality though and are (often deliberately) created as somewhat "universal" or vaguely Western European. A rename of the category may make this clearer (better suggestions for the new name are welcome!) Fram (talk) 13:22, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural oppose, this should be discussed together with the sibling categories. Just renaming Belgium does not make sense. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:42, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Without comment on what the categories should be for, the current category tree does contain some articles (e.g. Doctor Evil, Hercule Poirot) where the character is specifically Belgian but the creator is not, some where both character and creator are Belgian (e.g. Tintin (character)), and some where the creator is Belgian but the character is not specifically, or if they are no mention is made of it in the relevant article (e.g. Gil Jourdan lives in Paris; if he is canonically Belgian our article does not mention it). There are also several articles included which are about the work of fiction rather than the character (La Patrouille des Castors, L'Élève Ducobu). Whatever happens to the category it could do with cleaning up. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 12:45, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Tintin is never officially or canonically stated to be Belgian, although much points to it. But perhaps the category needs splitting instead of deleting then, any suggestions what the best name might be for the ones created by a Belgian? Fram (talk) 11:32, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 06:07, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Dimadick's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:06, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Swarthmore Garnet

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge/rename as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All the college's sports teams should be under one category. It seems like the football team is referred to as the Garnet Tide while all other teams are referred to as just Garnet -- this also means that Category:Swarthmore Garnet Tide should be renamed to Category:Swarthmore Garnet after the merger, and the following should all be renamed/merged:

--Habst (talk) 15:05, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag the additional categories. If there are no further comments in a week, we should be all set for renaming/merging.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:57, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Biodiversity Heritage Library Enthusiasts

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:Biodiversity Heritage Library Enthusiasts

Category:Video game protagonists

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge/delete as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:14, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These categories and all the children therein are really poorly defined: a lot of times characters in a series are often protagonists and antagonists depending on perspective, as we can see from just how often they overlap. A lot of it relies on WP:OR, and no other fictional media category has similar: even its counterpart in film was deleted years upon years ago. Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. There's a lot of overlap and these subcats aren't very necessary when the main cat covers all of this just as adequately. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Ministers for creative industries (Victoria)

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Essentially the same ministerial portfolio, just different names. No need to differentiate. GMH Melbourne (talk) 12:50, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Canadian Intellectual Property Office

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is only one page in there and I do not see any possible addition to this category. Thus, I propose deletion. Veverve (talk) 12:41, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 prosecuted under anti-homosexuality laws

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:People prosecuted under anti-homosexuality laws

Category:People charged with apostasy in Iran

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:34, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, these people were convicted in Iranian courts. We normally have convicted people in the convicted category tree, I am not convinced that we should do otherwise in this case. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:30, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:NBA championship–winning players by nationality

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge as nominated. The dash question for the nominated are eliminated by merging, so I don't see that as an objection to the proposal. Questions about the titles of the merge targets are out of scope for this discussion; feel free to file a new CFD. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge per WP:NARROWCAT. I don't think its necessary to divide championship winners by nationality when they are already in the nationality category for players. Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:10, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom, though we have deleted similar categories for winners of other sports championships like the Super Bowl.--User:Namiba 15:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is a huge problem with all these articles titles. They do not follow proper English and Wikipedia rules. Hyphens are used to combine, as with low-flying aircraft. Ndashes are used to separate to different phrases, like with a comma or colon. Plus even when an ndash is used it must have spaces on either side as with 1980 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles. Someone recently incorrectly moved all these articles and that needs to be fixed first before we compound the problem. It needs to be "championship-winning" with a hyphen. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I reported that fact to "Hey man im josh" but nothing has been done as of yet. The editor that requested the speedy move never seems to answer queries, and also seems to have been embroiled in many debates about his edits. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Indian Paintbrush (company) films

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:Indian Paintbrush (company) films

Category:People associated with Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:People associated with Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie

Category:Films with songs by the Sherman Brothers

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It makes sense to categorize Category:Songs written by the Sherman Brothers, but is it necessary to categorize the films in which they wrote songs for in this manner. Should this expand to include Category:Films with songs by Kenny Loggins and the like? Film articles tend to already get overcategorized as it is by genre, location, awards, producer, director, etc.. If kept, I'd recommend changing to "Films with songs written by the Sherman Brothers". StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 22:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Dimadick's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:25, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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


Category:Professional wrestling shows in British Columbia

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A request to speedily rename this category to match the contents of the category was opposed. There are no articles on this topic except for those which took place in Vancouver so this is an unnecessary layer of categorization. User:Namiba 15:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given this was opposed at speedy, giving extra time for objections.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:English High School of Boston alumni

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:English High School of Boston alumni

Buddhist cave temples

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Buddhist cave temples

Category:Foreign residents of Mexican California

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: not merged. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:59, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, unnecessary distinction, especially at provincial level, and for the larger part we do not know if people were naturalized or not. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:29, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quibbles with the proposed move: 1) Mexican California was not called Alta California from 1836 to 1847, but rather the Department of The Californias#Department_of_Mexico. 2) Therefore, "People of Alta California" would exclude people from the "Department" era. 3) I'm pretty sure that, for anyone notable enough to be in Wikipedia, we know whether they were naturalized or not. And willingness to pursue naturalization (or not) tells us a lot about those individuals. WCCasey (talk) 16:00, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on WCCasey's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle: Thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reping Marcocapelle :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Scientists from Plano, Texas

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:Scientists from Plano, Texas

Category:Gravity Rush (franchise)

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: purge. No consensus to delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:25, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There are only 3 real pages that belong here, GR1, GR2 and Kat. I don't think this passes the bar for a franchise category, much as I wish it did. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:23, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(category creator) For what it's worth, it also contains a navigation template and four files. I think PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale also fits in the category pretty solidly considering all its other franchise categories, and the two real-world people are relevant enough to categorize too, in my opinion. I'll say keep, but I'm fine if it's deleted (admittedly, all I know about Gravity Rush is from Scott the Woz). — gabldotink [ talk | contribs | global account ] 01:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, All-Stars Battle Royale shouldn't be in any franchise categories. Per WP:CATDEF, it has to be defining for the game (i.e. being a literal part of that franchise, not having a cameo character from it). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:18, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Seeing consensus to at least purge, but no consensus on whether this should continue to exist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Purge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:48, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Professional wrestling debut categories

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I don't see a scheme for debuts for pro wrestlers or really any other profession, just things like Category:Debut albums and Category:Directorial debut films. The year of a wrestler's debut is not a defining characteristic to the individual. These are available as lists in 1987 in professional wrestling#Debuts and 1988 in professional wrestling#Debuts, respectively. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 22:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The year wrestlers debut is noteworthy. Pretty much all Japanese wrestlers have rivals based off of the year they debuted like Chono/Mutoh/Hashimoto. Sometimes teams are formed based on years people debuted. There's often rookie cups and titles. I would look at it more like Category:1990 films. Unlike other sports or even movies, there's no organized amateur pro wrestling scene. You are a pro wrestler when you have your first match. KatoKungLee (talk) 01:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the category then be more along the lines of "Professional wrestlers who debuted in 1987"? Anyway, the equivalent in other sports would be a player's rookie season, and no one is categorizing Michael Jordan by playing his first professional basketball game in 1984. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 02:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rookies in other sports have already played organized ball for many years at various levels by the time they make the major leagues. Michael Jordan's first pro game was in 1984. When a wrestler debuts, they are a wrestler from that day forward. It doesn't matter whether it's in WWE or something like Ice Ribbon, it's counted the same because there are no organized amateur leagues. How long you've been around and when you've debuted tells you a lot about variou wrestlers.KatoKungLee (talk) 19:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:47, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 executed by the United States federal government by lethal injection

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:People executed by the United States federal government by lethal injection

Category:Juvenile prisons in England

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. A merge proposal might find consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicates Category:Young Offender Institutions. AusLondonder (talk) 14:56, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Shouldn't this be merged and redirected? SMasonGarrison 22:19, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle and Smasongarrison's comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:58, 20 November 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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Further back

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