Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All current discussions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

Speedy renaming and merging

[edit]

If the category and desired change do not match one of the criteria mentioned in C2, do not list it here. Instead, list it in the main CFD section.

If you are in any doubt as to whether it qualifies, do not list it here.

Use the following format on a new line at the beginning of the list: 

* [[:Category:old name]] to [[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~

If the current name should be redirected rather than deleted, use: 

* REDIRECT [[:Category:old name]] to [[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~

To note that human action is required, e.g. updating a template that populates the category, use: 

* NO BOTS [[:Category:old name]] to [[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~

Remember to tag the category page with: {{subst:cfr-speedy|New name}}

A request may be completed if it is more than 48 hours old; that is, if the time stamp shown is earlier than 00:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 78 open requests (refresh).

Current requests

[edit]

Please add new requests at the top of the list, preferably with a link to the parent category (in case of C2C) or relevant article (in case of C2D).

Opposed requests

[edit]

On hold pending other discussion

[edit]
  • None currently

Moved to full discussion

[edit]

Current discussions

[edit]
Shortcut

November 22

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

November 21

[edit]

Category:People from Obama Domain

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one or two articles in each of these categories, this is not helpful for navigation. The articles of the third category are already in the tree of Category:People from Fukui Prefecture so a merge is not needed. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People executed by the United States federal government by lethal injection

[edit]
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]

Category:People charged with corruption

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: containerize, follow-up on this earlier discussion, we shouldn't have articles directly in a "charged with" category. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Di (they-them), Reconrabbit, and RevelationDirect: pinging contributors to earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scientists from Plano, Texas

[edit]
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]

Category:Restaurants in Bristol

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 16:11, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is two enough to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Computer companies of Haiti

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only has 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Technology companies of Haiti.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Professional wrestling debut categories

[edit]
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]

Category:Gravity Rush (franchise)

[edit]
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]

Category:Haitian billionaires

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I would have said merge to Category:Haitian people but that category shouldn't have entries. Unlikely to be more Haitian billionaires out there. LibStar (talk) 04:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Foreign residents of Mexican California

[edit]
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]

Category:Swarthmore Garnet

[edit]
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]

Category:Further education colleges in Conwy County Borough

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Merge also to Category:Buildings and structures in Conwy County Borough and Category:Education in Conwy County Borough

Category containing only a single article, better categorised within the parents. AusLondonder (talk) 12:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bordeaux tram stops

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete/merge, duplicate categorization, these tram stops are already in Category:Bordeaux tramway stops. It is not meaningful to have categories of tram stops by neighbouring communes of Bordeaux, even more because most of these villages (in fact suburbs) do not even have a root category on their own. On top of that, many of these categories are very small.@Liz and Chris j wood: pinging contributors to this previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Buddhist cave temples

[edit]
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]

Ministers of the Victoria state government

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Most (if not all) of the capitalisations are inconstant with WP:JOBTITLE. GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:30, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per norm Ultraodan (talk) 08:23, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Female soldier and warrior characters in video games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Pointlessly specific and poorly defined, many of the character included are just 'warriors' which can apply to almost every fictional character depending on the amount of original research. Proposing merging into the target, then going through and cleaning up. Kung Fu Man (talk) 06:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A key problem there is the Warrior concept is so broadly defined, in any fiction almost any character could be justified as a warrior. It's better to let stuff like the martial arts or weapon user categories handle those kind of definitions.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English High School of Boston alumni

[edit]
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]
  • It may be a better idea to rename the article to Boston English and have the category renamed to Category:Boston English alumni. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:42, 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]

Category:10th-century Cypriot bishops

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Isolated cateogy. Upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 02:12, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


November 20

[edit]

Category:Further education colleges in Carmarthenshire

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Merge also to Category:Buildings and structures in Carmarthenshire

Category:Education in Carmarthenshire Category containing only a single article, better categorised within the parents. AusLondonder (talk) 21:04, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Juvenile prisons in England

[edit]
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]

Category:Trump administration personnel

[edit]
Nominator's rationale:I think we should differentiate between the first and second go-around for Trump. Vinnylospo (talk) 18:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question. What do the Cleveland administration categories look like?SMasonGarrison 22:20, 11 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) 17:58, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Whitnash

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing only the main article and a biography, both are already appropriately categorised. Unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 17:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Crouch, Swale's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:04, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • The biography does not belong here, per WP:COPSEP, it is appropriately in Category:Clergy from Warwickshire. The football club (article and subcategory) is likely to move away from Whitnash soon, it is barely a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:03, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle: perhaps we need more guidance on the number of pages a topic category or other categories should contain/could contain given SMALLCAT was deprecated. Whitnash parish had a population of 10,489 in 2021 but Stanhope had only 4,436 but Category:Stanhope, County Durham has 56 pages and a sub category. I'm not of the mind that we should keep all categories except those like Category:Churches in Kenton, Devon for example that would probably only even contain 1 page as most villages only have 1 or 2 churches but most villages/parishes like Kenton would probably be able to have a list of listed buildings and several would probably be clearly notable even if we assumed not every listed building was notable per WP:GEOFEAT and there would probably be one or 2 other things in the parish or something else associated with the village so add to a category. Consider Category:Grassington which until recently had only 2 articles other than the main article but now has a total of 10 articles. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:52, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Response to Crouch, Swale's latest comment? A subcategory and three articles as of relisting (one of which is a biography).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Members of the American Antiquarian Society

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: A non-defining characteristic. User:Namiba 17:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Times that 1100 Wikipedians supported something

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: We don't really need such fine-grained divisions. The amount of times 1000 Wikipedians or more supported something is already very low, and subdividing to the nearest hundred will leave most categories empty, or with one item at most. Having them all in Category:Times that 1000 Wikipedians supported something makes for better navigation. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree once we reach 1000 we should make it exponential if needed or by 500s •Cyberwolf•talk? 14:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Ngawi

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created and seemingly duplicates the longstanding Category:People from Ngawi Regency, which was emptied out of process to populate it (I have reverted those actions). Ngawi is ambiguous, so this category should not be titled without a disambiguator. It seems that subcategorization is not merited, but I don't have strong feelings about a merge outcome if the community decides renaming would be best. ✗plicit 12:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
small problem I have a strong feeling that all Indonesian categories should be consistent across all Regencies or Provinces, whatever the topic - I havent looked or checked, but individual stand alone categories against the rest of Indonesian categories should be strongly discouraged. JarrahTree 12:23, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fiction fandom

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: After removing some subcategories, I realize this category is kinda unnecessary, most things related to fandoms are associated with the fans of creative work(s) of fiction. A merge is highly recommended for how small this category has become is and why I believe it is unnecessary. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 03:37, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, it isn't so small that a merge would be necessary, it has no less than 10 subcategories. Besides I disagree with the first part of the rationale too, since sports fandom and music fandom are just as important. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Film and video fandom

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Why is it titled film AND video fandom? Shouldn't it be simply titled "Film fandom"? We already have "category:television fandom" which doesn't have a messy name like this one. I'm also removing several things unrelated to film from this category in accordance to the proposed rename. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 03:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Medical doctors from Rajahmundry

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 01:36, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Medical doctors from Jharkhand

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 01:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


November 19

[edit]

Category:Gardening books

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I suggest renaming to use 'about', per parent Category:Works about gardening. This variant is more clear. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If there's no opposition this should be fine but let's give it one more pass first.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 23:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confederation of the Rhine

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename and purge, from 1806 to 1813 Germany was called Confederation of the Rhine but it did not include Austria and Prussia. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:36, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Large nomination; allowing extra time for objections.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:53, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist to gather more participation and resolve concerns about precision being unnecessary.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 23:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:20th-century explorers from the Russian Empire

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Was opposed at speedy by @Altenmann: by the creator a similarly named user, in spite of the fact that there is no other category in Category:20th-century Russian people by occupation that uses the Russian Empire naming convention SMasonGarrison 20:44, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 23:05, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Puerto Rico Adjutant Generals

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Correct plural per Category:Adjutants general of the National Guard of the United States StAnselm (talk) 19:23, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 23:01, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Olympic football venues

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE. Content is already better shared at List of Olympic venues in football. User:Namiba 15:11, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ministers for the Arts (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: Withdrawn. Starting a new discussion addressing the broader issue of a number of subcategories within Category:Ministers of the Victoria (state) state government (non-admin closure) GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Ministries are the same portfolio just a different name. GMH Melbourne (talk) 03:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Postmasters general of Australia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Correct capitalisation per Postmaster-General's Department article. StAnselm (talk) 02:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: consistent with the corresponding article. GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Looking at the category's page history there seems to be a lot of going back and forth with the capitalision. GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why not? Category:Postmasters general includes offices from many countries, some of which use a hyphen, and some don't. (Of course, that category was moved twice speedily, without any discussion.) StAnselm (talk) 14:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the hyphen is important too. The rationale for moving the parent cat was "None of the 11 sub categories use a hyphen", but as far as I can tell that simply wasn't true - the hyphen for this category was removed three days later. Would you be OK with Category:Postmasters-general of Australia? StAnselm (talk) 18:00, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Birth control law and case law

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I think we should split this becayuse typically case law is nested under law SMasonGarrison 01:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films acted by Puneeth Rajkumar

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: We don't create categories for actors unless they wrote, directed or produced. Kailash29792 (talk) 00:58, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


November 18

[edit]

Category:Defunct NBA G League venues

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE. None of these venues are defined by formerly hosting G League games. User:Namiba 22:33, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Works about intersex

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: See Talk:Films_about_intersex#Requested_move_14_November_2024, Talk:Literature_about_intersex#Requested_move_18_November_2024, and Talk:Television_works_about_intersex#Requested_move_18_November_2024. Based on Category:Lesbian-related_television, Category:LGBTQ-related television, and Category:LGBTQ literature (siblings/cousins/analogues/relatives). Per this comment by Spookyaki. Web-julio (talk) 22:13, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Intersex

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: See Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_October_20#Category:Transgender (plus Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 30#Category:Feminism and transgender) and Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_October_12#(LGBT_identity)_fiction. Web-julio (talk) 21:59, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Marvel Comics film characters

[edit]
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]

Category:Christianity in Sussex

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Merge and redirect. Most content is at the level of East Sussex and West Sussex, so these are not currently helpful for navigation. Leave redirects to discourage re-creation. – Fayenatic London 11:59, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:15, 7 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) 21:42, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional extraterrestrial robots

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:NONDEF as, while they are a character type that appears from time to time, there does not seem to be something defining about the combination of extraterrestrial and robot in particular. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:03, 9 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) 21:17, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English Olympic medallists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: As per the recent deletion of Category:Californian Olympic medalists based on the fact that California and England and Scotland and Wales do not field Olympic teams, this category should be deleted. This came up in the discussion on California by editor @Marcocapelle:. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Scottish Olympic competitors etc. Those should probably be nominated too, but in the meantime it is a valid location for all the medalists. Crowsus (talk) 11:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think we need to be more explicit to get consensus (in other words, list out all merge targets explicitly :D). There is clear consensus in this discussion that the categories should not exist, however.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge to Category:English Olympic competitors, Category:Scottish Olympic competitors and Category:Welsh Olympic competitors respectively. Couldn't be simpler. Crowsus (talk) 12:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:National Hockey League goaltenders who have scored in a game

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: While interesting, this is WP:TRIVIAL. User:Namiba 20:57, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom, not defining and topic already covered by a comprehensive list article. Crowsus (talk) 12:49, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:PWHL

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The PWHL played its first season without permanent names but each team has since adopted one. These are the same franchises in the same places and same personnel. An attempt to speedy the renaming was declined. User:Namiba 20:41, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would rather keep the categories separate, such as with Category:Mighty Ducks of Anaheim players and Category:Anaheim Ducks players. Wheatzilopochtli (talk) 20:56, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think a key difference is that the original names were always intended to be temporary. They were placeholders.--User:Namiba 22:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It will still be technically incorrect in my opinion to say that Lindsey Post for example played for the New York Sirens. Wheatzilopochtli (talk) 23:37, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pubs in the Isle of Man

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing only a single article about a defunct pub which is now a private residence. Not helpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 15:19, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Former pubs in Devon

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. Better categorised within parent. AusLondonder (talk) 15:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Charities based in Gibraltar

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation and better categorised within the parent. AusLondonder (talk) 13:55, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Maps of Gibraltar

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single image and a module. Unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 13:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dunes of Gibraltar

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article that would be better categorised within the parent category. Unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 13:17, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Venues of the Bundesvision Song Contest

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE (also see Bundesvision Song Contest for background/nature of the specific competition/event). (All articles in the cat are sufficiently categorized otherwise.) Felida97 (talk) 12:46, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:FA Cup final venues

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE. (All articles within are sufficiently categorized otherwise.) Felida97 (talk) 12:08, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:2017 FIFA U-17 World Cup venues

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE. (Side note: Merging would empty Category:FIFA U-17 World Cup stadiums, which only contains the discussed cat.) Felida97 (talk) 11:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just saw that, apart from one, all articles were/are already in Category:Football venues in India and/or one of the more specific location subcats. I've just categorized the remaining one, so this might as well be considered a nomination for deletion. Felida97 (talk) 11:57, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:2021 FIFA Futsal World Cup venues

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE. Felida97 (talk) 11:25, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Journalists from Tirana

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Interscope-Geffen-A&M artists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: An editor emptied this long-standing category, created a new category, and then turned this category into a redirect to the new category. They should have gone for a speedy rename instead. I'm hoping that these two categories can undergo a history merge so that the page history of the original category is merged to the newer category. Liz Read! Talk! 03:55, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I accidentally added the wrong target as it was actually "speedy deletion". I meant to say WP:CFD (for "discussion"). Darrion N. Brown 🙂 (my talk page / my sandbox) 04:07, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Puerto Rican Freemasons

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: We don't have Category:American Freemasons by state or territory so why does this exist? Mach61 00:58, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


November 17

[edit]

Category:Universities in South Papua

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category with only one page in it SMasonGarrison 23:39, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fooian-century Fooian male/women classical pianists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I don't think we need to diffuse at the 5-way intersection of nationality, gender, century, instrument, and genre, especially since there isn't a FOOian-century male classical pianists or FOOian-century women classical pianists parent. SMasonGarrison 12:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on FL's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:20, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison and Marcocapelle: Thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:20, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So I get FL's point about size, but I'd still suggest considering non-classical parent category, such as Category:20th-century French male pianists, which only has 25 people in it, so not much information is really lost in that direction. SMasonGarrison 23:31, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cape Verde–United Kingdom relations

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing no main article and no articles at all. Subcategories already exist in sufficient category trees. Empty category is unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 09:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More participation needed to form consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:58, 8 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) 23:18, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • When trying to populate a new category with subcategories you would look for how the siblings are populated. That isn't any different in this particular case. So I don't understand FL's objection either. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:09, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, the fact that there is no article on the topic does not mean the category should not exist. Clearly the expatriate subcats are an aspect of bilateral relations between the countries so that is why the category was created. Or if that's deemed not to be sufficient, its a very half-hearted nomination given that there are 63 entries in Category:Bilateral relations of Cape Verde, 53 of which contain only subcategories, 40 of which are only 1 subcategory. Deleting one category achieves little unless it is being treated as a test case for others, but it hasn't been stated as such and ideally should have more participation to act as a credible precedent. But personally I feel they're mildly useful for navigation - alternatively, does the existence of a Foo-Bar relations article make a category for that subject more valid and useful? Maybe the whole Bilateral relations of Foo intersections should be looked at - are they needed at all? Crowsus (talk) 13:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Family of William Jennings Bryan

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: William Jennings Bryan was one of many notable family members so I think centering him is not the best way forward. It is Category:Bryan family (William Jennings Bryan family) in Wikimedia Commons. User:Namiba 15:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question: are other categories on Wikipedia named like you're proposing? SMasonGarrison 00:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there are some. See Category:Eliot family (United States) and Category:Morton family (United States).--User:Namiba 19:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This appears to be a fairly common formulation for categories relating to relatives or other topics concerning famous individuals, such as presidents of the United States, industrialists, etc. The proposed alternative, "Bryan family", would tend to attract unrelated persons named "Bryan" unless formulated as in Wikimedia Commons. However, that formulation seems rather pedantic—though it may well have a good reason for being so in that case, since there are probably quite a lot of photographs relating to William Jennings Bryan and his family, and it might be the product of a merger between related categories. There is no compelling reason why the corresponding category at Wikipedia needs to use the same formulation, though it may be advantageous to link the categories. The current title here is clear, concise, and logical. Let's keep it where it is. P Aculeius (talk) 17:39, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on P Aculeius's objection?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:14, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chemical looping technologies

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: From previous discussions and new research (from article), these specific technologies look to be chemical processes meant to act as a method of carbon capture. @DMacks I would appreciate input regarding the chemistry side — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChemicalBear (talk • contribs) 21:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was some pre-discussion on my talk page about procedural stuff. Pinging participants from the previous discussion: @Marcocapelle, DMacks, and Smasongarrison. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:52, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag the category. Comments on merge target would be appreciated. ChemicalBear suggests Category:Chemical processes; does that work for folks?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:13, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds fine as a merge target for me SMasonGarrison 23:32, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Evil child films

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: As per precedent set on multiple occasions, rename category to make it more clear that this category is intended only for films in which evil children are a primary aspect, not an incidental one. DonIago (talk) 22:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Writers from Pasco, Washington

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 21:46, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Travelers

[edit]
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]

Category:Viking Age slave trade

[edit]
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]

Category:James Bond articles up for deletion

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category isn't helpful anymore as it doesn't track current issues relevant to the project but anything that was ever sent to AfD. For current issues, we have Article Alerts which notifies projects about pages sent to AfD. Gonnym (talk) 15:17, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional kenjutsuka

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: It is unclear how the page creator arrived at the conclusion that these characters practice "Japanese swordsmanship" beyond the fact that they use a katana. It seems to be original research. That they use swords is not as up for debate, however. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:24, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Landsverk

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: selectively merge, the category only contains the main article and a very broad topic article, not specifically about Landsverk. The subcategory suffices and can be moved to Category:Economic history of Landskrona. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:00, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:History of transport in Landskrona

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: diffuse, except for the one article this isn't really about history of transport. Move the article to Category:Transport in Landskrona and move the ships built subcategory to Category:Economic history of Landskrona. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:48, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People by paranormal abilities

[edit]
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]

Category:Individual heroes and heroines

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created category with obvious WP:POV issues. Declaring real people to be "heroes" in general (not just recipients of some subjective award from a national POV) is inherently controversial. Will Armenians be OK with this being a parent to Category:National Heroes of Azerbaijan? Will Palestinians be OK with recipients of the Hero of Israel being here? Will the recipients of the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross or Hero of the Soviet Union be included? The previously existing Category:Heroes is limited to fiction and legend to avoid this problem. See also the comments in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of heroes by country and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of heroes. RL0919 (talk) 06:57, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Second, its supercategory is Category:People by behavior which is huge. It has for instance Category:Misers and Category:Imposters which, is a person who just lies about their education an imposter? It's subjective, well that is how reality works. Category:Rebels by nationality. "Rebel" is a real English word, yes, but who is a "rebel"? My rebel is your terrorist is the next guy's traitor. Who is an Outlaw? Gunslingers? Political prisoners? Serial killers? Subjective, and fine. That doesn't mean we should pretend the English term "Rebel" has no meaning and isn't an important characteristic of some people.
"Skeptics by nationality". Subjective. "Whistleblowers by nationality". Subjective. "Bibliophiles by nationality", which what does that even mean -- people with big book collections? People who read, write, or review lots of books? Literary people who are just neck deep in the world of books? Subjective. I think these categories are very good myself, but if you don't agree then clean up Category:People by behavior with a big well-attended discussion (and good luck with that). But let's not take the gaptoothed-smile approach and pick out this category and that category at random. That would be sujective. But if you really want to, this category is surely not the place to start.
Yes of course there are marginal cases for all these categories, very very many categories. Figuring out who should be in the categories is why we have knowledge, judgment, intelligence, and experience. Is that bad. Should we not have and use those things. Yes editors will disagree. Oh well that is the Wikipedia isn't it. If we had a professional executive editor to decide that'd be different. But we don't. We have to rely on our wits instead. "People who have received an actual Medal of Honor" as opposed to people who haven't is tidy and easy, but being tidy and easy for editors is not our main goal, and if that's that the only card one has describe people maybe that is not a great virtue.
Third of all, there are people whose defining characteristic is being heroic. In my mind that's super important. How the heck are you going to define, whose article reads

Joseph Lumpkin Merrell (1862 – 1939)[1] was an American sheriff. He was sheriff of Carroll County, Georgia at the turn of the 20th century who gained nationwide fame for stopping a lynching.[2] Articles about his bravery appeared in [many national papers][3] He is also mentioned by Mark Twain in his 1901 essay The United States of Lyncherdom.[4]

He's categorized as a sheriff. Well lots of people are sheriffs. Lots of people were born in 1862. The only important category he has is Category:Lynching in the United States. But was he a perpetrator? Victim? Defense attorney? Activist? No he wasn't, he was a brave hero and that is why he has an article and "being a hero" is more of a shared than "being an accountant"
Gabriele von Lutzau is in Category:Flight attendants. Is that why she has an article? Did she set a record for most miles flown or something? No, she was a heroine at Mogadishu. She is in Category:Hijacking survivors and Category:German people taken hostage but she was no passive survivor or hostage like say Theo Albrecht etc. etc. Very different things.
Von Lutzau has an article because she was a heroine. She just was, is all. And so forth. That is why I made the category, to serve the reader who is using categories for navigation or definition. "Serve the reader" is important. If you can't put people in the category which is the reason the person has an article... you are basically misleading the reader. "Oh OK he was a lyncher, I'm looking for heroes." Let's not do this. And let's not grasp at straws such as subjectivity (which I think I've refuted pretty well) or set up strawmen (since when do Palestinians or Russians or whomever have veto power over us? Armenians and Azerbaijani heroes would be handled the same as Armenian and Azerbaijani poets etc, whatever we are doing now. Right? POV can be put into a whole lot of our material, are we ruled by fear of that now?) These are really weak arguments, to delete material which is probably helpful to the reader. Herostratus (talk) 05:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Is the Namor a hero or a villain" Is this a trick question? That particular characters is known for constanty switching sides between heroic and villainous affiliations, and for his near-constant mood swings. Dimadick (talk) 16:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah taking out the categories would be justified I suppose, if you all want to. It's something that could be discussed on the talk page Unless the category is, I don't know, deleted. Then it can't.
I looked it up, and WP:NONDEFINING starts with "One of the central goals of the categorization system is to categorize articles by their defining characteristics" and there's more in that vein. Enh, we have lots of WP:RULES that conflict with WP:OTHER_RULES that we can WP:SHOUT at each in WP:ALL_CAPS. But I wouldn't overvalorize that.
Without this category, people like Joseph Merrill (sheriff) won't have a category with their defining characteristic, even tho the article says "Articles about his bravery appeared in the New York Evening Post, the Atlanta Constitution, the Louisville Courier Journal, the Washington Star, and the Boston Herald". That is why I made the category. For people like him. I looked at Harriet Tubman and it has "Frederic Douglas wrote 'The midnight sky and the silent stars have been the witnesses of your devotion to freedom and of your heroism'." Kate Larson (historian) wrote a book "Bound for the promised land : Harriet Tubman, portrait of an American hero". Granted Tubman has a couple-few other defining categories, so that's not the only defining category. But for Gabriele von Lutzau, Joseph Merrill (sheriff), and Thomas Beloat (Thomas Beloat (February 6, 1855 – February 23, 1946) was an American sheriff of Gibson County, Indiana at the turn of the 20th century noted for stopping a lynching... Beloat was one of two law enforcement officials whose bravery in preventing lynchings...), and Abraham Zelmanowitz (Has President Bush saying "And we have seen our national character in eloquent acts of sacrifice. Inside the World Trade Center, one man, who could have saved himself, stayed until the end at the side of his quadriplegic friend." That's four and and I'm sure there are at least a few more.
So... if we can't have this category, these persons don't have a defining category, and the article should maybe be deleted, which is not unreasonable for the four cases I've found so far. That's not my call. But that's a weird reason to delete articles IMO.
I think the best way forward here is to ask of all these types of categories (there are quite a few, I mentioned a couple above) should all be deleted. That's a reasonable position, maybe they should. IMO individual things of a set being deleted cos somebody random came across it is messy and not excellent. I'll set up a thread in say [[Talk:WP:CATEGORIES]]. Until then, I'd like to request relisting until that's talked thru. Herostratus (talk) 09:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let's not. It's a big global question. I posted just where people might be interested, WP:Categorization, I have no idea what there would think either way, and I deliberately avoided mentioning this thread or even the exact category name just so that people would have to dig to find us here, so it's as non-forumshopping as I could possibly do. The thread is Wikipedia talk:Categorization#Tension between WP:NONDEFINING vs. WP:SUBJECTIVECAT and WP:CATDEF which I think describes the root issue, after some digging and thinking about it. Herostratus (talk) 19:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Made a minor fix to the link so it goes to the right section.) RevelationDirect (talk) 20:38, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As someone who worked to change several WP:OC editing guidelines and still has concerns with one, I'm willing to engage over the application of the guildine here and the underlying wording there.
Unless broader editor interest in revising WP:SUBJECTIVECAT emerges, I wouldn't support delaying this nomination though. RevelationDirect (talk) 20:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK that's fine. Herostratus (talk) 08:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional Ninjutsu practitioners

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Can this really be separated from ninja in an obvious way? Due to extreme WP:OVERLAPCAT, I suggest selectively merging and any who do not apply should be upmerged to Category:Fictional practitioners of Japanese martial arts instead. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:47, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tyrant flycatcher stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The use of the English name for this category seems silly. Tyrannidae is easier to type out; the template is named Template:Tyrannidae-stub, not Template:Tyrant-flycatcher-stub; everything in this category is supposed to be there because of the template; and most of these categories use the scientific name, including every other subcategory of Category:Tyranni stubs. Grey Clownfish (talk) 06:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Melee weapons

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Given melee weapon was deleted, this category in itself is facing a crisis. I suggest a merge for any applicable articles, as it is no longer a viable means to categorize things. This also includes any subcategories reading "melee weapons" to be merged into their respective nation subcategory. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will add the countries to the nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:43, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding to the nomination; no opinion on the merits. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:50, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Languages written in Latin script

[edit]

Nominator's rationale: This category, as one that is a decade old, is not even implemented correctly; currently, it is more dependent on subcategories than pages in the category itself, but even then some languages like Indonesian or Filipino aren't even included there. However this trait should not be defining because Latin is the most common writing system. This category still does contain some languages that aren't written in the Latin script by standard, such as Hassaniya Arabic or Meitei, but I don't think trait is defining either. Other categories under Category:Languages by script may be kept, or maybe they'll be deleted as if writing systems as a whole are not defining. You decide. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 05:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the problem for including per-language subcategories as members rather than pages? In fact there should not even be any "page" (i.e. Galeries on Commons). Galeries are not relevant very for languages that have many aspects.
That category is relevant especially for languages that are commonly written with several scripts, and there's a need to subcategories per script (Latin being one of them), and then properly index the contents written in each script (so not all per-language categories need to be members, as most languages have a default script and there's still no need to distinguish them; but that's not even treu for English which is multiscript, even if Latin is its default).
This category should just be fed (very slowly) according to the IANA or CLDR databases and their related use in BCP 47 where categorizing per script is needed: if we categorize English written in Deseret, and list English as a member of "Language written in Deseret script", then we still need to list it also as member of "Languages written in Deseret script". As well we cannot assume a single script in many languages (not even Arabic! Which is also written in the Latin script in some wellknown Arabic variants, and for which case we have distinctive contents in Commons, that we do not want to mix with other Arabic-Arabic contents where we'll have difficulties to locales Arabic-Latin contents, jsut like we'll have difficutlies to locate English-Deserrt contents if they are all mixed deeply within English-Latin contents.)
Even if the Latin script is the most widely used one in the world, we don't want to place any image in that Category:Languages written in Latin script. All that is designed is to have subcategoeies members (and notably languages that are known to be written in mutliple scripts). We don't need per-language galeries as members (even if there are a few ones, these galeries should just be members of their own category to be listed as members). So that category should only contain subcategories, not galeries, not files for images/logos/symbols/audio/video that all should be placed in relevant subcategories of the per-language category (and possibly of the language-script combination category). Commons is not a videogame to play with for your convenience in Antarctica, it is for educational purpose.
Your statement also about "Hassaniya Arabic" is wrong: it is also written in the Latin script (as a standard in a wellknown country where it replaces the Arabic script in frequent cases). The same remark applies to Meitei (as written in Assam where the Latin script more common than the Meitei Mayek script for that language, even if it is not recognized officially, just because the language itself is still not recognized locally in order to promote the Bengali-Assamese script). It is a clear sign that you make this deleteion requrest based on false unchecked assumptions about how languages are written. And this is perfectly why such category by script is useful: it helps collecting facts that are countering such false assumptions, and make these facts more visible and easier to locate. This category will then grow very slowly but surely as needed as we get medias about them and categorize them properly to avoid them being lost in the mass where your assumption takes its root. Commons is especially useful when it collects medias that are otherwise difficult to find and study.
The fact that this categotry is "old" is not relevantat all as a criteria for deletion. The fact it has few members and thuis count progresses very slowly is aldo not relevant at all (this is per design), and this does not hurt at all but improves the indexing of Commons, to distinguish contents per language-script and locate them correctly (by helping finding language-script combinations when they are more rare and precious). verdy_p (talk) 07:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Request: Can you please be more concise? This is a lot of text to ask volunteers to dig through. SMasonGarrison 16:24, 9 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) 03:41, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional males by franchise

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Few to none of the things in here qualify as a franchise, making this category misleading. Made by a blocked user. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If not kept, merge? Dimadick seems to imply a rename? Still no consensus to change anything... thoughts and further comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Demon superheroes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The combination of demon and superhero does not appear to be defining, at least without evidence that it is. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Zxcvbnm's latest comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:17, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Serious games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining/overlapping SMasonGarrison 12:39, 9 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) 03:15, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tiziano Ferro redirects

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There are no album or song redirect schemes such as there is for television episodes (e.g. Category:Episode redirects to lists). StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 23:29, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then there are tens of thousands of these redirects in Category:Redirects from songs that really should be further organized in some way, for maintenance purposes if nothing else. I have been working with the songs, albums and redirects of this artist and have found it helpful to organize the dozens of related redirects. I don't see the need for deletion, and actually I'm encouraged to create a scheme.— TAnthonyTalk 23:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But assuming this idea will horrify the music redirect community, I can accept a consolidation to Category:Tiziano Ferro redirects.— TAnthonyTalk 23:50, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Find it helpful for what? What are you looking for by categorizing variations on the title of L'amore è una cosa semplice created as redirects? Any actual redirects (not misspellings, miscapitalizations, etc.) for albums or songs that are listed in the discography or track listing can be merged to the parent albums/songs category. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 06:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I admit I do not understand what Marcocapelle means by a "maintenance process" – what would you like to see in order to support keeping/merging the categories? If you support keeping/merging the category, is that something that can happen?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there an answer to Marcocapelle's question?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:57, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Restaurants in Hoboken, New Jersey

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:03, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Five entries (one of which is a redirect) as of relisting. Is that enough to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes...Djflem (talk) 20:37, 14 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) 02:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lost in Quebec and Marcocapelle: thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:56, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Celtic stone heads

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Move to Celtic stone idols, as per recently created article that widens scope. Ceoil (talk) 02:38, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American slave trade

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Seems to cover the same scope BaduFerreira (talk) 20:41, 2 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) 00:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lean oppose. Per Marco Procedurally, the merge target is too broad. SMasonGarrison 02:01, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte 👸♥ 00:50, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


November 16

[edit]

Category:Football in American Samoa

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per a recent RfD, football in American Samoa now points at American Football in American Samoa. To avoid confusion where American football articles would get tagged here, and to create a clear place to put soccer venues, we should rename this category to name it as "Soccer". This would also bring this category in line with parent categories Category:Soccer in the United States and (Category:Soccer in insular areas of the United States). — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 21:26, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Template:Palestine

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: duplicate category. For context, the naming scheme "Category:Template:<topic>" is used in some language editions of Wikipedia, but not in English Wikipedia. —⁠andrybak (talk) 20:29, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional scarred characters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category has an issue in that scars are often non-defining for characters, for example an instance where a character had a very small scar somewhere nobody even mentioned. It would be better to classify the odd instance where a scar might be defining in the parent category of disfigurements instead rather than have a category devoted to it like this one. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:21st-century American fashion designers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_March_3#Fashion_designers_by_century The norm is that modern occupations like fashion design, models, activists etc aren't diffused by century SMasonGarrison 15:59, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a related category about the Category:19th-century American fashion designers at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_11#Category:19th-century_American_fashion_designers @Marcocapelle: SMasonGarrison 16:11, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tesla, Inc. vehicles

[edit]

Category:Tesla, Inc. vehicles needs discussion. Is the ", Inc." necessary to disambiguate? All Tesla vehicles, it would seem from looking through Wikipedia articles, are vehicles from "Tesla, Inc.", yet those vehicle article names do not include the "Inc." bit in any of there names. Seems that Category:Tesla vehicles should be sufficient. I would propose that simplification. N2e (talk) 15:16, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please tag your nomination.SMasonGarrison 16:02, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Broad gauge locomotives in Brazil

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: procedural close, the nominated category does not exist (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 16:29, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Broad gauge locomotives in Brazil — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.24.178.73 (talk) 13:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Like Category:Creative works, this needs specification that it involves in-universe creative works rather than just containing works of fiction. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:27, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:GLAM

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: better understandable category names. It was listed for speedy renaming by User:Gonnym and opposed by User:Armbrust since C2C is not clearly enough applicable here. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. While the projects are created as sub-pages and titled as Wikipedia:GLAM/National Archives and Records Administration, a C2D would be WP:National Archives and Records Administration, but the category system as gone for Category:Wikipedia-National Archives and Records Administration collaboration, which makes the proposal correct. Gonnym (talk) 09:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lowell mill girls

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Non defining. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:02, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sportspeople from Tewksbury, Massachusetts

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just 1 entry. Had 3 but two of them were improper. A person isn't from Foo just because they died there and the articles had no mention of Tewksbury in any other way. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:50, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Various video game franchise categories

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Multiple categories for franchises containing only 2 articles each. Each category has just one article for the first game and the other for a sequel. These kinds of categories usually require a significante amount of content. I mean, would you need to make a category for Slime Rancher? QuantumFoam66 (talk) 04:57, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American soccer players of Nigerian descent

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I am going to nominate all the Fooian sportspeople of Bar descent cats in due course after all the British ones were upmerged, seems no difference between them and other countries. This one is a level deeper, to a specific sport, and is not defining in any way for either the individuals or their heritage as significant to their sport careers. Crowsus (talk) 00:03, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte 👸♥ 04:54, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Ermesinde

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created 1-article category. Category:People from Porto District works fine. Gjs238 (talk) 02:42, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Male actors in Gujarati cinema

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate categories that are effectively cut and paste moves. The category creator emptied Category:Actors in Gujarati-language films and moved them to Actors in Gujarati cinema. If the decision is to keep the new name, the older category should be renamed, instead of the new category being kept SMasonGarrison 01:26, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:UKS SMS Łódź players

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: UKS SMS Łódź is a multi-sport club with football, volleyball and other sections. Propose renaming from "players" to "footballers" to avoid ambiguity and potential confusion. - Darwinek (talk) 00:51, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Charlotte Amalie of Hesse-Kassel

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEPON and WP:SHAREDNAME
No conceptual objection to this category but there's only two articles beyond the biograpy. And one of those is Charlotte Amalie, U.S. Virgin Islands, a pre-existing town renamed after the queen. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:32, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


November 15

[edit]

Category:American actors by location

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer SMasonGarrison 23:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American male actors with disabilities

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Do we really need a 4-way intersection between nationality, gender, occupation, and disability? per WP:EGRS. SMasonGarrison 23:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Teetotallers

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Was G4'd.. The Bushranger One ping only 02:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Single-entry category for a non-defining characteristic. The person filed here was a Prime Minister of Finland, so the question of whether he drank alcohol or not is not a centrally defining facet of his political career. Bearcat (talk) 23:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:February 29 births

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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 per G4. FYI as reviewing admin an isolated creation of a February 29 category is sufficiently different from a more general births by year scheme that I wouldn't G4 the first as a recreation of the second. But here both have been deleted several times before so there's no doubt G4 applies. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:56, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category for a non-defining characteristic. We categorize people by their year of birth, but not by their month-and-day of birth, and the fact that February 29 doesn't happen every year is not a reason why being born on February 29 would be more defining than being born on February 28 or March 1. Bearcat (talk) 23:02, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Found another previous deletion discussion: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 13#Category:Leap day births. Felida97 (talk) 14:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just saw the more recent Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 April 11#Category:People born on February 29, which resulted in "no consensus", and even more recently, Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 February 16#Category:People born on February 29, where the result was "delete" and which was subject to a deletion review, where the deletion was endorsed (see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 February 26#2010 February 16). Felida97 (talk) 15:32, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate 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 Abkhazian people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, category contains only one article, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional ranged weapons practitioners

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Falls under WP:SUBJECTIVECAT as any character who throws their weapon may be considered a "ranged weapon user" even if the weapon is not intended to be used at range. Created by a blocked user. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:54, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People sentenced to death

[edit]
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]

Category:Fictional robbers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: See WP:OVERLAPCAT. Extremely duplicative with the older category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Robbery is differentiated from other forms of theft because it involves violence, per the main article. Theft is not necessarily a violent crime, robbery involves either violence or the threat of using violence. Dimadick (talk) 05:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional bandits

[edit]
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]

Category:World Baseball Classic venues

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:PERFCAT User:Namiba 19:05, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Negro league baseball venues still standing

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I'm not sure if this category should be deleted and turned into a list or renamed but I don't think it should stay as is. User:Namiba 19:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Airliner accidents and incidents caused by bird strikes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Aircraft accidents are seldom attributed to a single solitary cause; a number of interrelated factors are typically involved, and in some cases, the primary cause of an accident is strongly disputed. The proposed category name is more neutral, and is also more consistent with existing subcategories under Category:Accidents and incidents involving airliners, e.g., Category:Airliner accidents and incidents involving runway overruns. Carguychris (talk) 18:58, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Converts to Baptist denominations

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Seems better, and matches the subcats for converts from Islam. – Fayenatic London 14:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Independent Baptist

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Seems clearer than the current title which, even though it currently matches the main article Independent Baptist, is an adjectival phrase missing a noun. – Fayenatic London 14:08, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:California pioneers

[edit]
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]

Category:Deadly fungi consumed as a food

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT: is this intersection really helpful? Currently contains only one article; I can find no more entries in the parent categories which could fit here. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 12:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Comic poets

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Current name is confusing. While in classical scholarship these are often called simply "comic poets" and the fact that they are ancient Greek is assumed from context, in a general encyclopedia it's not obvious that this category should solely be for ancient Greek writers. Periodically comic poets who are not ancient Greek are wrongly put in this category, which is part of Category:Ancient Greek comedy and Category:Ancient Greek poets by genre. (See today here and here which gave me the motivation to actually start this discussion, but it's a problem I've seen before). Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 12:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:FIFA World Cup stadiums

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is textbook WP:OCVENUE which states Avoid categorizing locations by the events or event types that have been held there, such as arenas that have hosted specific sports events. I don't think the guideline could be any clearer. --woodensuperman 09:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Establishments in the Grand Duchy of Hesse

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, except in 1869 these are all one- and two-article categories, which is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:47, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mission Indians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: purge and selectively merge, this category contains very few articles which are really about Mission Indians, most articles are about current tribes in California some of whose ancestors were Mission Indians. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Mission Indian is still a term very much in use today. California tribes are definitely split by those who were missionized and those who were not; the ramifications are still felt today. Fifteen tribes still use the term "Mission Indians" in their official name. Yuchitown (talk) 00:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial buildings in Egypt categories

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NARROWCAT, all should be upmerged to Commercial buildings in Egypt. voorts (talk/contributions) 04:20, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Decorating

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Contains only one article; possible duplicate of Category:Decorative arts QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Romani people in art

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: It only has just one article, it might be merged into some other category but I can't think of anything right now. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Once a handful of articles is written we can easily recreate the category. It does not make sense to create categories in advance though, that is really not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:29, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The category has now been improved and populated with a "handful" of existing WP articles on Romani people in art, including extremely well known people such as Tracey Emin. It seems to have been a neglected category, but not an irrelevant or useless one. Netherzone (talk) 15:09, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Plantations in the Danish West Indies

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:CATNAME
This is just a truth in advertising nomination since all 43 articles in this category are specifically sugar planations. The Danish version of the Triangular trade focused on this single crop. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:55, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I tagged the USVI category and notified the creator as of this timestamp to allow for the merge proposed above. - RevelationDirect (talk) 22:22, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Older discussions

[edit]

The above are up to 7 days old. For a list of discussions more than seven days old, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All old discussions.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/All_current_discussions&oldid=1255390992"