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 23:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 327 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]
the point is to have a 'prehistoric monotypic bird genera' cat embedded in a 'extinct monotypic bird genera' cat. (we can reput the two examples above into the latter) just as 'prehistoric animals' is embedded in the 'extinct animals' cat. --Couiros22 (talk) 17:02, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, just create a new category? - The Bushranger One ping only 20:55, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • What exactly is your problem, sir? The vast majority of Wikipedia articles related to the ancient Near East use "ancient Near East" (the same goes for the articles/categories about ancient Rome, ancient Greece and ancient Egypt). Also, "Museums of Ancient Near East" categories are missing the definite article regardless of your preferences ("Museums of the Ancient Near East" or "Museums of the ancient Near East").--Russian Rocky (talk) 21:49, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm fine with adding "the" - it's "ancient" that needs discussion. If it it is true that "the vast majority of Wikipedia articles related to the ancient Near East use "ancient Near East" (the same goes for the articles/categories about ancient Rome, ancient Greece and ancient Egypt)" this is only because of recent campaigns by a handful of capitalization fanatics, acting without discussion or consensus. Johnbod (talk) 04:19, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • So why don't you discuss it on Talk:Ancient Near East instead? To begin with, there is not enough people in CFDs to discuss this matter. Also, what "capitalization fanatics" are you talking about? Are you aware that "Ancient Near East" was changed to "ancient Near East" in 2011 (Talk:Ancient Near East#Capitalization)? Here's an excerpt: "According to The SBL Handbook of Style For Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Early Christian Studies (p. 153), "Ancient" should not be capitalized, not in "ancient Near East" nor in "ancient Near Eastern"." Since 2011, nobody has talked about capitalization on Talk:Ancient Near East.
Except Category:Novels set in the Ancient Near East, Category:Films set in the Ancient Near East, Category:Sculpture of the Ancient Near East, other categories with no definite article should be renamed in any case. I suggest to stick to "ancient Near East" at first because it's more widespread inspite of your claim about "a handful of capitalization fanatics" (you provided no evidence that "ancient Near East" is controversial and is under discussion). Personally, I don't care whether it is "ancient Near East" or "Ancient Near East", but the current consensus is apparently the former and let's stick to it.--Russian Rocky (talk) 20:38, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most category and article page names do use lowercase "ancient" in phrases like "ancient Rome" and "ancient Greece" (excluding language designations). See usage throughout the Ancient Rome page, Social class in ancient Rome, Patrician (ancient Rome), Timeline of ancient Greece, Category:Wikipedians interested in ancient Rome, Category:Novels set in ancient Rome, Category:Prosopography of ancient Rome, Category:Wars involving ancient Greece, Category:Battles involving ancient Greece, Category:Culture of ancient Greece, and Category:History books about ancient Greece for examples. I believe we should aim for consistency in article and category names. Many of these pages and categories have had these names for quite some time and were not moved recently. If you would like to use uppercase in phrases like "Ancient Greece", why not propose this at the talk pages of the main pages? WikiEditor50 (talk) 06:54, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, please. Unfortunately, I can't figure out myself what Johnbod's problem is. He claimed that the vast majority of Wikipedia articles related to the ancient Near East use "ancient Near East" because of "recent campaigns by a handful of capitalization fanatics, acting without discussion or consensus", but there is no evidence that "ancient Near East" is controversial and/or is under discussion. I agree with InverseHypercube on Talk:Ancient Near East who said the following: "According to The SBL Handbook of Style For Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Early Christian Studies (p. 153), "Ancient" should not be capitalized, not in "ancient Near East" nor in "ancient Near Eastern"."
  • See The SBL Handbook of Style For Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Early Christian Studies (Appendix A: Capitalization and Spelling Examples) at the Internet Archive: p. 153: "ancient Near East (noun)" "ancient Near Eastern (adj.)".--Russian Rocky (talk) 08:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold pending other discussion

[edit]

Moved to full discussion

[edit]
Category:1975 establishments in Chattisgarh is an empty category so it could have just been tagged for CSD C1 or moved without going through CFD. Liz Read! Talk! 08:17, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It became empty after the nominator moved the two entries to the proposed target. I will now move them back and will move the category in 48h provided no objections have been raised against speedy move. Ymblanter (talk) 08:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Current discussions

[edit]
Shortcut

January 1

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

2100s and 2110s

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Merging isn't needed, the subcategories are kept in the decade tree anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:54, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The respective contents are Category:Films_set_in_the_2100s (first three categories), Category:2114 works (2114), and Category:2110s_in_film (2110s in mass media). Far too soon for anything except what is already there. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:03, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Category:2114 was not tagged; I will do so. If there are no further comments we are all set for deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Legal families of Australia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is an odd triple intersection without a "Legal families" parent. But "Legal families" is also problematic, since a Legal family is a grouping of laws. I picked this title for a rename but would be open to other ideas. Mike Selinker (talk) 22:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Collins family

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per this discussion, we renamed a category to Category:Collins family (England), so this is worth renaming to specify its country, especially since a similar U.S. category is inevitable. Mike Selinker (talk) 22:39, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:History by decade

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, no clear distinction versus its parent Category:Decades. Categories by decade are history categories by definition. This is follow-up on this earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sm8900, LaundryPizza03, Jc37, and Pppery: pinging contributors to previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:21, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, appreciate the ping. however there are many many decades categories which are not history. they cover facts and events, and trends, and artisitic works, which may not actually be real "history." such as for example: 2020s in sports, 2020s in film, 2020s in television, 2020s in music, 2020s in radio, 2020s in food, 2020s fads and trends, 2020s fashion, 2020s toys and 2020s slang, etc etc Sm8900 (talk) 19:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The term "history" simply refers to everything that happened in the past. Those things aren't history only because they're too recent. Decades later, each of those things will be just as much history as what you call real history. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I really don't understand "they cover facts and events, and trends, and artistic works, which may not actually be real history." Facts and events happen some time in history, trends begin and end some time in history, artistic works are made some time in history. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle, what I meant is that a toy that existed in the 2020s, or a film, or a new fashion item such as a garment, would not intriniscally be part of the topic of "history", but they could still all be part of the category for that decade. a head of state, or a war, or an election, are intrinisically part of the history for the country where they occurred. Sm8900 (talk) 21:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

3C2A

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This subject has been commonly referred to as "3C2A" as opposed to "CCCAA" since 2023. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 17:41, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Actors under Channel 3 (Thailand)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Performer by performance overcategorization. Actors are not categorized by the television networks that happened to air the television series they acted in. Bearcat (talk) 15:52, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians in Scouts India

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Without even an article on Scouts India this clearly doesn't serve a useful purpose. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:21, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not helpful for contributing to Wikipedia. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:55, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is an article for scouting and guiding in India Iamvivekkj (talk) 02:52, 26 December 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, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Flora

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: It is totally redundant. Category:Biota was merged in Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_March_23#Category:Biota, and Category:Fauna has always been a redirect. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:46, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Biota by biogeographic realm

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with all other biota categories. In fact, one of the nominated categories was an exact duplicate. I'm not sure if the ocean-based ones should be suffixed with realm, as their parent categories are not. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Higher-level bird taxa restricted to single zoogeographic regions

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: An odd grouping that isn't part of an established system and is redundant to "Endemic fauna" categories. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:23, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Endemic birds of East Asia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: None of these three taxa are correctly placed. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Psychological warfare handbooks and manuals

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains one article, seems unnecessary Prezbo (talk) 11:44, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Psychological warfare unless it is possible to place it into a more specific category. I'm not sure about this one. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Torture handbooks and manuals

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains one article, so seems unnecessary. Prezbo (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the one article will have been placed into Category:Torture in the United States. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Urban guerrilla warfare handbooks and manuals

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Seems too specific, thinly populated (I removed a couple), the line between "guerrilla warfare" and "urban guerrilla warfare" is very blurry. Prezbo (talk) 11:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge also to Category:Urban guerrilla warfare. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment After nominating this, I realized that Wikipedia no longer has an article on Urban guerrilla warfare -- it was redirected to Guerrilla warfare last year. So maybe I should be asking whether Category:Urban guerrilla warfare needs to exist as well? Prezbo (talk) 13:37, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Khan cricketing family

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: At minimum we should make this change to match other subcategories of Category:Sports families. But also, is this the most famous family of Khans in cricket? Category:Family of Imran Khan might beg to differ. If folks agree, maybe Category:Khan family (Bangladesh) is wiser. Mike Selinker (talk) 06:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Karras football family

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Needs to specify the right kind of football, and also match other subcategories of Category:American football families. Mike Selinker (talk) 05:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Massachusetts whaling families

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is an odd triple intersection with no parent on the whaling side. We should create the parent and also make sure these are in the Massachusetts family category as well. Mike Selinker (talk) 05:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Amuze games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Company has too little output to warrant its own category. Literally two games so it isn't really needed. Article had already been redirected for lack of notability beyond its products. MimirIsSmart (talk) 03:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Category-Class 20th Century Studios pages of NA-importance

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There are no category-class pages of non-NA importance, and as such this duplicates Category:Category-Class 20th Century Studios pages. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:46, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. We should open a mass CfD for all NA-importance categories for non-articles. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Arab supporters of Israel

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category should either be renamed to be consistent with the child categories of Algerian Zionists etc, or the subcategories should be purged or renamed. Being a Zionist doesn't mean that you support the state of Israel. Zionism advocates for a Jewish homeland; not all Zionists support the state of Israel. And people who support Israel don't need to do so because of Zionism. @AHI-3000: for making me aware of the category naming discrepancy SMasonGarrison 03:29, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support and also rename Category:Muslim supporters of Israel to Category:Muslim Zionists, in order to match it with Category:Arab Zionists and Category:Christian Zionists. AHI-3000 (talk) 03:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with adding the category to the nomination. But you need to tag it. SMasonGarrison 03:50, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison: I already placed the CFD template on Category:Muslim supporters of Israel. AHI-3000 (talk) 03:55, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison: Should we combine #Category:Muslim supporters of Israel into this discussion? AHI-3000 (talk) 04:53, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"I'm fine with adding the category to the nomination" SMasonGarrison 04:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Supporters of Israel are explicitly Zionists. Dimadick (talk) 03:34, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes indeed. @Smasongarrison doesn't agree though, even though almost everyone agrees that "Zionist" is usually used to mean "supporter of Israel". These meanings are far from being mutually exclusive. AHI-3000 (talk) 03:41, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's the point of tagging me? I literally made the nomination. I don't disagree that the common understanding is that these are often used as synonyms. SMasonGarrison 03:49, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So do you agree or not that Category:Muslim supporters of Israel is an appropriate subcategory of Category:Zionists? AHI-3000 (talk) 03:51, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not appropriate until it is renamed. SMasonGarrison 04:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Muslim supporters of Israel, but I still do not see consensus for any particular action. Further discussion would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus to do anything in particular, but purge Category:Arab supporters of Israel as suggested by LaundryPizza03?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • LaundryPizza03 makes a very good point (e.g. the Moroccan subcategory only contains a Moroccan Jew) but removing the subcategories does not really solve this. We should rather nominate the subcategories separately for selective upmerge to the Arab parent. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Neapolitan families

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: A request to rename to Category:Families from Naples was opposed on Speedy, in favor of this better name. Mike Selinker (talk) 03:26, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Kaliforniyka's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Alvarado wrestling family

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Opposed on Speedy. The article is at Alvarado wrestling family but this is a subcategory of Category:Professional wrestling families, so I thought the rename made sense. Mike Selinker (talk) 03:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Professional wrestling families. Further discussion on which category should be renamed is needed :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:26, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose moving to "category:wrestling families". Professional wrestling is not the same thing as wrestling. They share similar moves, but it's similar to the difference between a Ballerina and a Gymnast.Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The proposal to merge Category:Professional wrestling families will be posted in the lead.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Establishments in Iran, pre-1935

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Alright, starting a new year! Most pre-1935 categories have fewer than five pages. Also, is there a precedent that Wikipedia should be using the name Iran prior to 1935? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: HNY. I'm working through mosques (globally); and will be adding the year/decade/century of establishment, where known. Some may be be pre-1935; others after. I'm just finishing off the mosques in Canada, right now. I'll tackle Iran next. Yeah, pre-1935 is a problem. What should be used, prior to 1935, Ottoman Empire, Safavid Iran, Persia, etc.? Rangasyd (talk) 02:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We would use Safavid Iran only between 1501 and 1736, unless consensus is to use Persia for this time period. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:23, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support at least until and including the 19th century. Many categories with only 1-3 articles is unhelpful for navigation. The establishments categories in the early 20th century become somewhat better populated though so I am neutral on those. As for the name Iran, see also Name of Iran. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters by attribute

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is not necessary. There are no other categories using "By attribute" in the title. This category was probably only created to move all the subcategories of Fiction characters that begin with "Fictional characters by" in the title (but for some reason someone has recently removed Fictional characters by medium). It's like if I made a category titled "Films by attribute". Attribute is also used incorrectly; the noun would specifically refer to a quality (something good; which would be opinionated); not just any trait. Simply merging with fictional characters is highly recommended but perhaps we could also make a new category titled "Fictional characters by in-universe trait" that would be used the move subcategories from the parent and this category including fictional orphans and billionaires? Maybe not. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]



December 31

[edit]

Category:Disambig-Class Star Trek pages

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The category name is misleading: 15 of the 23 pages in this category are not "Star Trek pages", they are dab pages that contain some Star Trek-relevant entries. How about "Disambiguation pages with Star Trek entries"? Paradoctor (talk) 23:06, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Purge all but those entries which are exclusively related to Star Trek. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can see where there is an interest to track dab pages with Star Tre-related entries, so maybe this option should be a split instead?
FWIW, I think keeping these together seems preferable. Paradoctor (talk) 13:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Musical families

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Nearly all other families that need disambiguation have the type of career at the end, in parentheses, such as Category:Jackson family (show business). Also, Category:Newman family (music) is already named this way. It's reasonable to standardize these. Mike Selinker (talk) 18:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Identity theft victims

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: None of the 8 people in this category seem to be defined by being victims of identity theft. My first choice is deletion. If not deleted, I think that this category should be repurposed to Impersonated people, so that it can be a broader. SMasonGarrison 18:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Winners of Eurovision Young Musicians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with related categories (e.g. Category:Eurovision Song Contest winners, Category:Junior Eurovision Song Contest winners, Category:Melodifestivalen winners) Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pesma za Evroviziju contestants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation (see previous discussion where parent category was nominated which was a procedural close) Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nationaal Songfestival contestants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation (see previous discussion where parent category was nominated which was a procedural close) Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Festivali i Këngës contestants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation (see previous discussion where parent category was nominated which was a procedural close) Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Eesti Laul contestants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation (see previous discussion where parent category was nominated which was a procedural close) Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:23, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Beovizija contestants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation (see previous discussion where parent category was nominated which was a procedural close) Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:23, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Benidorm Fest contestants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation (see previous discussion where parent category was nominated which was a procedural close) Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:23, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Eurovision Song Contest entrants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Renominating (see previous discussion which was a procedural close); WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation (subcategories were already deleted; see previous discussion here) Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:19, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. The Eurovision Song Contest generates a lot of publicity, but categories are qualitative (e.g. singers), not quantitative (by amount of publicity). Marcocapelle (talk) 15:14, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep: See comment below D4NT3023 (talk) 17:46, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep: 1. As pointed out below by D4NT3023, the alleged violation (WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") DOES NOT APPLY. It would apply if the category was something like Performers in Cats (musical) or Singers who have performed at Carnegie Hall. Neither of these applies: Eurovision is not a venue and it is not merely a performance: it is a competition, like a sporting event. Note wording: "Avoid categorizing performers by an appearance at an event or other performance venue. This also includes categorization by performance—even for permanent or recurring roles—in any specific radio, television, film, or theatrical production (such as The Jack Benny Program, M*A*S*H, Star Wars, or The Phantom of the Opera)." Eurovision is not a specific television production, since the events in the competition vary each year in an unscripted way. 2. The alleged WP:NONDEFINING violation does not apply. As others have commented (refer previous discussion), entering in Eurovision is not a soon-forgotten event like entering in "American Idol". Eurovision entrants represent their country, and in this respect are similar to Olympic competitors. Their status as entrant in Eurovision is invariably a high point in their career and remains something that defines them. Consequently, articles on Eurovision entrants invariably mention this fact as a defining characteristic: for instance, the page for the Irish group Sheeba states "They are best known for representing the host nation, Ireland, in the Eurovision Song Contest in 1981". In some cases, their status as a Eurovision entrant is the only memorable event recorded about them, e.g. Christine Minier. However, other Eurovision entrants have used their public exposure in Eurovision as a springboard to build successful careers, despite not winning on the night, e.g. Natasha St-Pier, Amina Annabi, Cathal Dunne. SRamzy (talk) 18:37, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Participation in Eurovision is defining because it's one of the first things mentioned about these artists by reliable sources (even in the article about ABBA, their Eurovision participation is among the first things mentioned, despite them being notable for a lot of other things too). That said, this category currently does not have any subcategories, although its scope includes over 1700 artists. Such a large category really should be diffused, which is why I am puzzled by the closure of the previous discussion about the subcategories. That discussion had two people opposing deletion with policy-based arguments, but they were completely ignored. (Besides, I created a few of those categories myself but I was not notified about the discussion?) ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 19:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:You're a Star contestants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Renominating (see previous discussion which was a procedural close); WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:17, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Turkvision Song Contest entrants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Renominating (see previous discussion which was a procedural close); WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:16, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Participants in the Bundesvision Song Contest

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Renominating (see previous discussion which was a procedural close); WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:16, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Eurovision Young Musicians Finalists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Renominating (see previous discussion which was a procedural close); WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Eurovision Song Contest conductors

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Renominating (see previous discussion which was a procedural close); WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American Song Contest contestants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Renominating (see previous discussion which was a procedural close); WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:14, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dansk Melodi Grand Prix contestants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Renominating (see previous discussion which was a procedural close); WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Junior Eurovision Song Contest entrants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Renominating (see previous discussion which was a procedural close); WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violation (subcategories were already deleted; see previous discussion here). Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melodifestivalen contestant categories

[edit]

Nominator's rationale: I believe these to be WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violations (see previous discussion where parent category was nominated which was a procedural close)

[edit]

Nominator's rationale: Renominating these categories (see previous discussion which was a procedural close); WP:PERFCAT (specifically "Performers by production") and WP:NONDEFINING violations. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 13:51, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment/Possible Keep: As a response to all of the above nominated "performers by production" categories, I'll just add my two cents – you make mention to the performers by production rationale, but I feel like that does not really apply. For some of these competitions, it is the norm for the same singers to return year after year and their career and notability as artists exist almost entirely on competing in these competitions multiple times, almost making them recurring cast members rather than one-time performers. Now this is of course a case-by-case kind of thing and there are some categorized artists who likely have only competed in one of these competitions a sole time so it is not defining for them, and I'm not sure what to make of those situations. But take Melodifestivalen for example, where if you go to almost any competing artist's article – Ace Wilder, for example – you'll see that details about her numerous participations in Melodifestivalen take up the bulk of her article and her Melodifestivalen entries are her only notable songs. So I feel like claiming "Melodifestivalen contestants" is a non-defining category here is kind of just not true, it is incredibly defining of her career as an artist and notability, and this is the case for a lot of these artists who are categorized here. Of course, it is case-by-case, but painting it all with a broad stroke like you're doing is just not accurate to me. As was also mentioned in the additional discussions, "performers by production" seem to refer to simple performances (like in a play or TV series), not participations in a competition. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 14:49, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. The example of Ace Wilder isn't convincing at all as she had many other performances too. The defining characteristic of the article is that it is about a musician and the article is already in numerous musician categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:25, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I'm failing to see how all of these nominated categories fall under WP:PERFCAT, especially Category:Eurovision Song Contest entrants (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), considering Eurovision is indisputably the biggest music contest in the world. National finals that receive their own entrants categories tend to be those that are high-profiled in their countries and internationally to warrant having their own article, and by extension, categories relevant to them. I don't even agree with the fact that Eurovision entrants by year categories were deleted but I can see some reasoning for that D4NT3023 (talk) 17:46, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Politicians arrested in Turkey

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: SMasonGarrison 02:52, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per reasoning below. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:53, 24 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, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Politicians arrested in the Maldives

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between being arrested for a crime and occupation. SMasonGarrison 02:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. We don't classify people by having been arrested. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:52, 24 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, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:31, 31 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]

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) 05:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:49, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would purging be a better solution? SMasonGarrison 18:37, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hello Girls

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Delete and recategorize; this is supposed to be a category for what is known as "Hello Girls" who were switchboard operators but also has women who seemingly had nothing to do with it - not sure how it helps with navigation. Biographical articles should be diverted to Category:Switchboard operators and Category:Telegraphists where appropriate. Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:10, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:46, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:RMS Titanic's crew and passengers

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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; I noticed it may complicate other navigation. (non-admin closure) Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:55, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only two categories and two articles here which isn't helpful for navigation. Upmerge to parent category. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:32, 31 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:Agents-General for Australian states

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Decapitalise General as per MOS:JOBTITLES. Change "for" to "of" for consistency with other categories such as Category:Attorneys-general of Australian states and territories or Category:Treasurers of Australian states and territories Steelkamp (talk) 12:16, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:New Zealand Women's Ice Hockey League

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROW. Just the league article and one team article. –Aidan721 (talk) 01:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ice hockey in Venezuela

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Contains only the national team article. The article is already appropriately categorized in the parent categories. Delete per WP:NARROW. –Aidan721 (talk) 01:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Possibly fictional people from Europe

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: parent is People whose existence is disputed. The current name is inconsistent. See conversation on the talk page for context from the creator: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Category_talk:Possibly_fictional_people_from_Europe SMasonGarrison 04:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updated: Add other country/continents as renames. I've added the relevant existing legendary child categories if they exist. SMasonGarrison 18:18, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am seeing at best lukewarm support for the new name, but there is clear consensus that a change is needed. Does jc37's Category:Legendary X people suggestion work for people?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:50, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Most of these people lived (if they did) before concepts like nationality and ethnicity were invented so we should not bother too much about that. The place where they were assumed to have lived should be decisive. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I just don't see the need for creating the potential for that ambiguity by changing "from Europe" to "European". Most of the people in the North American category were European, for example, and plenty of them are late enough to have been considered that by contemporaries. Furius (talk) 18:44, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shooting civilians following mistaken identification

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This current name is awkward. My best attempt right now is "Accidental civilian shootings", but I'd love better ideas. I'm also not sure if this counts as defining, so that's also worth discussing. SMasonGarrison 22:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The proposed name, Category:Accidental civilian shootings, is much broader than the current name, it includes many accidents while using the weapon (cleaning it, checking it, etc). It is a different category. דוד שי (talk) 04:23, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete? If renamed, rename target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:33, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 30

[edit]

Category:Russian military personnel of the war in Donbas

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is a subcategory of Category:Pro-Russian people of the war in Donbas and has a subcategory Category:Pro-Russian military personnel killed in the war in Donbas. The War in Donbas involved Russian separatist forces in Ukraine who were not all part of the Russian military.
An alternative would be to change Category:Pro-Russian military personnel killed in the war in Donbas to Category:Russian military personnel killed in the war in Donbas as proposed as a speedy nomination.
Related speedy discussion
TSventon (talk) 20:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Just purge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Military families by nationality

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per Category:Salvadoran families and other subcategories of category:Business families by country. Moved from Speedy after objection. Mike Selinker (talk) 00:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Mike Selinker: Wouldn't C2C dictate that the categories above should stay xyz families by Country, instead of switching to Country xyz families? Hey man im josh (talk) 17:08, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just following up about this @Mike Selinker. To be clear though, my objection/question starts from military families onwards. I don't have an opinion on the other family nominations above that. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd argue that the precedent is in the "[Nationality] families" scheme. But I could see it going either way.--Mike Selinker (talk) 23:11, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment A looooot of these categories are inappropriate intersections between the people by country and people by nationality tree. I think we first need to decide in which of these two trees we want the business families and military families to be in, because it cannot be both. Country is probably more important than nationality: business people can have nationality A while running well-known businesses in country B, and soldiers with nationality A can serve as mercenaries for country B. The country you serve, or the country you operate your business in, is probably more WP:DEFINING for you as a person or family, or that society you work in/for, than the flag in your passport. NLeeuw (talk) 00:43, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The suggested renaming obfuscates the fact that the categorization should be by nationality, not by ethnicity. Categorization by ethnicity should be for things inherently cultural/antropological. --Altenmann >talk 09:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think it should be by nationality either, but by country (see my comment above). NLeeuw (talk) 01:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I seriously considered closing this as no consensus; WP:RELISTing seemed unlikely to help. I suspect that this is heading towards no consensus, but I will let this play out. Responses to NLeeuw's comment would be appreciated, as would more participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Windmills 1400-1800

[edit]
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: merge, up to 1800 these are mostly one-article categories, unhelpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge - Although my gut feeling was to keep, having so many categories with only one or two articles in seems overkill. In most cases, I don't see there being much impact from merging these categories as proposed. Gazamp (talk) 14:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs more participation to form consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Boycotts of apartheid South Africa

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, better grammar. (I am definitely open to other suggestions.) Marcocapelle (talk) 18:07, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:48, 22 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) 22:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Premierships in Canada

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Differentiation from subnational premierships. RedBlueGreen93 00:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category lists articles from both of Macdonald's non-consecutive terms as prime minister. RedBlueGreen93 00:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category lists articles from both of Trudeau's non-consecutive terms as prime minister. RedBlueGreen93 00:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category lists articles from both of Duplessis's non-consecutive terms as premier. RedBlueGreen93 00:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename or split?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Slavery in Italy

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:56, 14 December 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, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:49, 22 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) 22:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual reality -> Extended reality

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Those categories should cover the broader reality-virtuality continuum, so that's why i'm proposing a mass-rename of several virtual reality-related categories. Especially that the mixed reality market has started booming after Apple's $3499 magnum opus and Meta's first ever consumer-oriented mixed reality headset. However, the case with "Virtual reality pioneers -> Extended reality people" is that they are not exclusively pioneering those technologies but can have various different associations with them. Oh, and, also that there are barely any augmented or mixed reality-related categories. 67.209.128.52 (talk) 22:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1st century BC in Judea

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, isolated category with one subcategory only. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:06, 9 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) 17:07, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is the split (as proposed by Fayentatic london) a good alternative?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@The Bushranger, Fram, and Jc37: Thoughts on the split proposal? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No objection to the split. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Female murder–suicides

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I'm usually of the opinion that in criminology, gender does tend to be a fairly discussed intersection, but this makes no sense. The murder-suicide categories are not strictly for the perpetrators of the events. Is a "female murder-suicide" supposed to be female perpetrators of murder suicides, or victims? By who is tagged here, this is clearly trying to be the perpetrators, but that's too ambiguous, and doesn't match up with the way any of the other murder-suicide categories are used. This is also a very specific intersection and one I am not sure is defining, unlike murderers generally. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep / oppose deletion. This is very clearly supposed to be about women who commit murder-suicide. I'm not sure what your confusion is about? If Category:Female murderers and Category:Female suicides are defining on the basis of gender and cause of death, then why not when they happen simultaneously? Especially considering how rare it is for women to commit a murder-suicide, news of such events are notable enough to get articles, and thus a category to contain them. Especially for the subcategory Category:Female suicide bombers. AHI-3000 (talk) 09:21, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not very clear, the title is ambiguous. A female murder-suicide could just as easily be one where a woman is a victim. The murder-suicides category is applicable to articles on victims and event based articles as well.
It is not defining, there is no category tree for "murder-suicide perpetrators" which is what this is trying to be. The subcategory is fine because we already have the suicide bombers category tree. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dimadick, what do you think about this? AHI-3000 (talk) 23:18, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It seems to cover only women who commit murder-suicide. No confusion there. Dimadick (talk) 01:09, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dimadick In contradiction to every other category in this tree - every other one is for both perpetrators, events and victims. Why would the victims be excluded from the scope of this category, when it is not obvious by the name, and all other similarly named categories have a different scope? Why are we only tagging people and not events? We have no tree for murder-suicide perpetrators. When I read this, I thought it was for femicides. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:38, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You thought it was a duplicate category? Femicides are covered in Category:Femicide. Dimadick (talk) 11:34, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dimadick A femicide is not always a murder suicide. I thought this was about femicide murder-suicides, which are discussed in literature. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:52, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not my fault you're confused about the scope of this, it's been made clear that this category is for individuals who committed both murder and suicide. AHI-3000 (talk) 17:39, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AHI-3000 Then the category should be renamed to reflect its scope, as “Female perpetrators of murder–suicides”, instead of masquerading as an event-based category when it’s really trying to be a person category. I still don’t think this is defining but it’s at least clear. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:51, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PARAKANYAA: I'm fine with a renaming if that's what you really wanted in the first place. AHI-3000 (talk) 20:52, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PARAKANYAA: Though "Female murder–suicide perpetrators" would be better and shorter than what you suggested. AHI-3000 (talk) 21:27, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AHI-3000 Yeah that’s better. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PARAKANYAA: Do you prefer to have this category deleted or renamed? AHI-3000 (talk) 21:32, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AHI-3000 My issues with this category are twofold:
  • Misleading, in that its actual scope is not clearly indicated by its title. This would be solved with a renaming.
  • How defining is "Murder–suicide perpetrators" vs murderers? I feel that this existing as a "female" subcategory of...a category we do not have, is odd. Is "Murder–suicide perpetrators" itself a defining category? Or murder-suicide victims? If this is changed to that, I feel those categories would follow. It's not obviously trivial, but I am not sure how others would feel about it. The way we handle the murder-suicide categories is very odd in that we have victims, perpetrators and events all lumped together, but since it's such a broad category I have never known how to deal with it.
So a rename would be a major improvement over it being kept as is but the implications of this category concern me. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:54, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PARAKANYAA: Instead of just deletion, could you modify the proposal for the optional possibility of renaming it too? AHI-3000 (talk) 18:49, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Appears to be rough consensus to rename to something like "Female perpetrators of murder–suicides", but further discussion is needed to determine the exact naming scheme to be used.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I still oppose deletion no matter what. I am neutral/ambivalent about renaming this category, it doesn't really matter to me whether the name stays the same or not. If we do choose to rename, I think "Female murder-suicide perpetrators" is much better than "Female perpetrators of murder-suicides", because the former name would be shorter, faster and catchier to say than the latter name. AHI-3000 (talk) 04:10, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that if we keep it AHI-3000's proposed name is better. I still have concerns over whether this will create a whole new tree by existing and how defining it is. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The other concern is that there are hardly any biographies about female murder-suicide perpetrators, articles are primarily about the event, not about the perpetrator (who is non-notable apart from the event). Marcocapelle (talk) 16:01, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Eh, that isn't much of a concern to me. The way categorizing crimes like this works is inherently wonky - the crime and the person are so closely related notability wise that it makes sense to do it this way. Often sources about events like these will almost entirely be on the perpetrator but we write it event based because of policy, or the event will just be called "person's name murder case" or the like. Hence such categories are reasonably defining - I just wonder about this specific crime since it overlaps so much with murder. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Blacksheep original programming

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, single-article category while the channel does not even have an article. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Autological words

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This requires some head-wrapping, but this category is a set category, so all articles in this category must be about an autological word. However, per WP:UMD, these articles aren't about specific words. For example, the article Noun is in this category, and indeed the word "Noun" is autological. But the article is about nouns in general, and nouns aren't per se autological.
Besides, a word being autological is merely a nerdy curiosity, and although I too am a nerd, I don't think anyone browsing Wikipedia is helped by this category. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 19:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Filmed deaths during transport disasters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT and WP:NARROWCAT. "Disaster" is a subjective term as applied to transport accidents, and most are not widely described as such. Additionally, I propose that this category should be upmerged directly under the Category:Filmed deaths category tree. Carguychris (talk) 19:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Yoon Suk Yeol government

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To match in line with categories about presidencies of other nations like the United States. The President of South Korea is the head of state and government like that of the President of the United States. Categories with the name of the head of government is the prime minister and is the head of government in most nations.
All categories here are not of prime ministers of South Korea, but the presidents. And it should be reflected as such with the names of the categories nominated. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy rename per C2C. This is also needed because the Prime Minister of South Korea is a separate office. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:10, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Baseball venues by competition

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is a more accurate name. 29 of the 30 categories are for ballparks in a certain league, wieth the lone exception being Category:College World Series venues which can be reparented. User:Namiba 19:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Baseball players from Juniata County, Pennsylvania

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 14:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Christians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, unnecessary and arbitrary distinction, nothing became different about being a Christian or about sainthood at the Council of Nicea. The Edict of Milan was probably more impactful on being a Christian, but still it does not make too much sense to create container categories for three and two centuries respectively. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:09, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Funk carioca genres

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Consistent with pt:categoria:Gêneros de funk brasileiro. This is more accurate since carioca implies related to Rio de Janeiro, and not every subgenre is carioca. Example, Funk ostentação () and Funk ousadia are highly associated with São Paulo instead. LIrala (talk) 04:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People who have been placed under house arrest in Iran

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Being arrested isn't defining. SMasonGarrison 03:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. House arrest is a form of detainment post-conviction, but we do not even have Category:House arrest. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:24, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:America's Classics winners that have closed

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per Category:Defunct restaurants and subcategories. --Another Believer (Talk) 03:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm totally fine with that. Jjazz76 (talk) 03:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Then hoping for a speedy rename here. ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:African-American women centenarians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Similar to recent case of Category:Jewish centenarians by gender, I don't think we should be splitting this intersection by gender. https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_December_13 SMasonGarrison 01:06, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 29

[edit]

Category:Professional Women's Hockey League lists by team

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: As a relatively new league, "by team" list categories are not yet useful. Merge/delete per WP:NARROW with no objection to recreation in a few years when teams have many lists each. –Aidan721 (talk) 22:21, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Peggy Jay family

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: procedural nominaton, this was opposed at speedy because there was no speedy criterion applicable. Nom's rationale was: "To better summarise the contents as the family is wider than just direct relatives of Peggy Jay." I have no opinion about the proposal myself. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indigenous leaders of the Americas

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, consistent with Category:Indigenous leaders in Canada and Category:Indigenous leaders in South America and more correct grammar. "Of" may suggest that they were leaders of the entirety of the Americas, which was not the case. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:11, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Thanks for doing the legwork. I'm neutral on "of" versus "in", but I do think it's worth noting that the norm is "Category:Indigenous people of the Americas", and that the rest of the categories in Category:Indigenous people of the Americas by occupation, resemble category:Indigenous musicians of the Americas. SMasonGarrison 21:21, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:World War II military aircraft

[edit]
Extended list of categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: Per the results of the prior CfD for WW1, which (although not participated in much) closed in delete, and for much the same reason: we generally don't categorize military equipment by war, because it's the sort of "performers by performance" categorization that is discouraged. While in this case, yes, it could be argued that for many types here WW2 service is somewhat defining, when you get down to the nitty-gritty it becomes less clear. Is the Avro Anson, for instance, defined by its World War 2 service in the Finnish Air Force? It doesn't seem likely. Categorizing only by manufacturing nation's service both eliminates some types' actual service (the Martin Maryland, for instance, is a U.S. type but was exclusively operated by the RAF) and is redundant to the "1930s/1940s military aircraft of Foo" tree, while opening the floodgates to everyone would result in some very long category sections for some aircraft. Overall this is a good example of why we don't categorise "Item by Service in X" - and it's broadly incomplete and has been for over 20 years, as well as being scattershot in its naming format to boot, so proposing deletion. Note that Category:World War II jet aircraft is excluded as a small, actually defining-due-to-newness categorization. The Bushranger One ping only 10:57, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm not sure WP:PERFCAT applies, mostly b/c wars are significant inter/national events that don't happen at the same frequency as performances, and it should be up to WT:MILHIST to decide (and to subsequently make explicit in WP:PERFCAT). Speaking of which, why wasn't WT:MILHIST notified of either CfD? These CfDs have large implications, and the WW1 one shouldn't have been closed without more discussion, or at the very least WP:SILENT consensus after a WikiProject notification. Ping to closer Bunnypranav.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  11:34, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I did wonder about that - notifying that one slipped my mind, I'll admit. This one I was going to but had incoming storms just when I was posting this, I'll do so now. And as mentioned, it's not explicitly PERFCAT, but a similar principle that I've observed applied broadly at CfD - which makes sense in this case, given the reasons I mentioned as to why this is, functionally, either redundant or unworkable. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:39, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Have posted a reply to the notice Bushranger put up at MILHIST regarding the previous CfD closure. Didn't immediately realize that it might have been necessary. Thanks for the ping! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:28, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete in the spirit of WP:PERFCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:45, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep While the category does contain tons of overlap, I believe it should be kept because it is a notable enough factor in an aircraft. Service during wartime affects the development, design choices/role, and production of an aircraft. I think one major concern with the category is the fact that it's poorly defined in terms of what qualifies as a "WW2 military aircraft" such as what countries it entered service in and the role it served in those countries. I think the category would be greatly improved by working with WP:MILHIST to create standard criteria for what can be included. In general I think more time should be spent trying to fix the category first instead of deleting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tylermack999 (talk • contribs) 23:33, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I think there's something worth saving here, but I think the problem is that they are being split by intended task (bomber, recon, etc.), which I think we all likely agree is a form of Overcat. I think these should simply be split by country ("...of use" - these don't seem to be "manufactured in" cats), and then diffuse/subcat by Military branch. (For example, in List of aircraft of the United States during World War II, these aircraft are split by military branch.) - jc37 22:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In many cases doing it "by country" would result in truly massive categories, and I'm pretty sure we don't categorise weapons by user. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If split by military branch, I'm not sure that they would be that big. And please correct me if I'm mistaken, but I believe that, in most cases, these are proprietary aircraft to each country, with distinctive design/look/outline/etc. Which feature throughout the mass media of the time (including various art forms), so these are a bit more than merely weapons. I'm normally a proponent of lists for certain things, especially when members need clarifying explanation of membership, but I don't think that applies in this case. - jc37 23:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure I understand what you're saying about "proprietary aircraft to each country". Note that military aircraft as a whole (not just WW2 types) are categorized in Category:Military aircraft by country already. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That the aircraft for each country was distinctive and specifically made to be so. Presumably with the goal that one might not shoot down same-side aircraft.
    All that said, looking at your link, I see: Category:1940s United States military aircraft and Category:1940s German military aircraft (etc), having a lot of subcats similar to those nominated. I think the WWII cats could easily fit as subcats of these. That said, I would not strongly oppose a merge to this tree. It's basically just a switch from categorizing by "era" to by "decade". - jc37 00:00, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There's no need to merge, actually - all the aircraft here (and a lot more WW2 types alongside them - as I mentioned the nominated tree is very, very incomplete) are already in those categories. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:¡Uno! ¡Dos! ¡Tré!

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There is no scheme to categorize songs from a series of albums by that series. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 22:39, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know there's Category:American Idiot but that's because there are more related articles beyond the songs from the album itself. Is there a need to begin having categories for songs by album? StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Split or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 08:03, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Morozov family (merchants)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Everybody with the last name Morozov on Wikipedia is in this category and listed on Morozovs. There are apparently more on the Russian Wikipedia, but that shouldn't guide us here. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are two different and unrelated Morozov families. One is a boyar family, the other is a merchant family. They should not be merged into one. Otherwise, it may cause unnecessary confusion. Aronlee90 (talk) 05:33, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Orthwein business family

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Everybody with the name Orthwein on Wikipedia is in this category and listed on Orthwein, so a disambiguator seems unneeded. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:25, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sausmarez family (Guernsey)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Everybody named Sausmarez or Saumarez with a Wikipedia article is in this category (and in Saumarez), so I don't think we need a disambiguator. I think we should look to Saumarez and make this match the article title, even though there are two ways to spell the name. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:21, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dimitry Family (Creoles)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I don't see any other articles on people with the last name Dimitry (with a y) that aren't in this category, so I don't think the disambiguator is needed. Regardless of that, "family" should be decapitalized. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chavasse family (United Kingdom)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Everybody with the surname Chavasse on Wikipedia is in this category and listed on Chavasse family. No need for a disambiguator. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:14, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 28

[edit]

Category:People pardoned by John Adams

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Each of the categories nominated has only one or two entries. pbp 16:49, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I like it the way it is bc (1) it makes the parent cat of presidential pardons tidier and navigable, and (2) it makes the presidents' cats more informative bc pardons is one of their constitutionally defined duties/privileges (along w naming judges etc). But whatever the community wants is cool, no big deal either way. jengod (talk) 17:17, 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> 15:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus between keep and upmerge, but there is agreement that the categories are defining.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Just wanted to respond to the comment above that "People in these categories do not really have something in common, except they were just lucky." (not to pick on the OP specifically at all it just got me thinking and I wanted to respond) I don't have a strong background in the political science of American presidential pardons but would not say that "lucky" necessarily applies to these people. Many or most of these pardons had some political significance. In some cases it appears to be corrupt. In other cases it's simply very much topical to a president or political party's position on some issue, or just a relic of a certain phase of American history. Just from doing the sort, it's evident that pardons for the Fries' Rebellion, or the Alien and Sedition Act, or for being a Confederate cabinet officer, or for Mormon polygamy, or for "socialist agitation", or for Iran Contra either all had very intentional political impacts or were intended to be a message. The one I know best is Fontaine H. Pettis (bc I wrote it), who is so far a singleton in his category. It's not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he was pardoned by Andrew Jackson for political rather than purely moral or ethical reasons but his brother was a Congressman and the year after he was pardoned, his brother and a relative of Nicholas Biddle got into a dispute related to the Bank War and ending up dueling each other to the death. All of which is to say, I would argue that it's more defining that he was pardoned by a specific president (Jackson) than that he was presidentially pardoned as opposed to gubernatorially pardoned or what have you. Anyway. That's my 2¢. carry on! jengod (talk) 23:10, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Meigs family

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Purge and possibly delete. A lot of the contents of this category seem to just share a common name rather than being closely related to Jonathan Meigs and Elizabeth Hamlin Meigs. SMasonGarrison 14:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you actually read the articles and go through the references you they are the same family. There are many other family categories that are similar, not sure what the angle is here? Nayyn (talk) 14:58, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you go through the history of these individuals they are of the same family and the locations are named after members of the same family. There are many other similar family categories such as this. I'm not sure what the angle is to delete or rename? If the category is not prominent enough, then why not AdD all of the members of the family for which it relates. Nayyn (talk) 15:00, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My angel here is that this category includes everything with the word "Meigs" in it. SMasonGarrison 16:50, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thats not the case. This is not a container for everything with the name. I took the time to be mindful to include only those that are connected.
Oppose. Nayyn (talk) 23:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are contradictory judgments on which articles are related to the Meigs family.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:35, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose renaming: We didn't have a statement or citation to this effect (altho we do now) but it looks like Camp Meigs was named in honor of Montgomery C. Meigs. Similarly Meigs County, Ohio is named for Return J. Meigs Jr. So purging placenames is one option, or we could create a subcategory, Category:Places named for members of the Meigs family. In addition to the placenames, FWIW, there also appears to also be a disease and a redlinked invention named for a family member. All that said, I personally think this category is in line with similar family categories--ships and houses named after people, namesake military operations, namesake philanthropic projects are often included--and doesn't need to be changed. jengod (talk) 23:58, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Purge everything except the biographies, Meigs Elevated Railway (which was invented by a member of the family), and possibly the Meigs Raid (led by a different family member). Based on the above comment by Marcocapelle. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pornographic actors who died by suicide

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between specific acting genre and cause of death. SMasonGarrison 14:50, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Serves these purposes for Category:Suicides by occupation
If Sucides by occupation is a relevant category than these subcategories are too. @Smasongarrison what about deleting that parent category then?
Nayyn (talk) 14:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please review Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. I think you would do well to make a case that this intersection is defining. SMasonGarrison 14:59, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, trivial intersection. Most sibling categories should go too. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:04, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and to me this here should be speedily closed. There's an ongoing proposed deletion of the category "Suicides by occupation". This proposal (and the rest of them below) is moot; if "Suicides by occupation" is deleted then of course all of these should be too; if it's not deleted, then there's no reason to single out specific occupations for deletion. Besides, this intersection is far from trivial: [2], [3] Rkieferbaum (talk) 19:01, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok -- so there is a lot to unpack -- so you think this category should be kept as defining if the parent category is also kept? But that if the parent category isn't kept, you think this should be deleted? Am I reading you correctly? SMasonGarrison 20:01, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, pretty much. It’s quite simple, really: either it makes sense to have “suicides by occupation” or it doesn’t. I believe firmly that it does because the correlation between the two isn’t frivolous (it’s not like we have “suicides by hair color” or any such nonsense). If it does, then the category granularity should be defined by whether there are enough articles to populate that category. There’s no reason to be curating which occupations should or should not be categorized (provided, as I said, that “suicides by occupation” is kept). Rkieferbaum (talk) 22:39, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your cites focus on mental health in pornographic actors, which isn't the same thing as a specific cause of death. SMasonGarrison 03:59, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You know suicide is essentially a mental health issue, right? Besides, from one of the links: "Lynn said she has deep concerns for today's porn performers. '(...) the actors of today, we lose a lot of them, because there's a lot of suicides, for many different reasons.'" I could go on and on... the topic could arguably have its own article. The intersection is far from trivial. Rkieferbaum (talk) 11:29, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If there was a well sourced article linking suicide and this profession, I would certainly reconsider. In my life I've heard the following cause suicide: listening to the wrong music, having an abortion, not having children, and not attending church. While I'm open to there being occupational hazzards, we also need to make sure we're not categorizing based on a moral panic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 16:36, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Suicide and mental health are related, but your references aren't making a case that that's sufficient for defining. I just don't see enough academic coverage for an article on suicide of pornographic film actors. SMasonGarrison 19:30, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Appears to be WP:TRIVIALCAT, since the intersection is not defining. - RevelationDirect (talk) 16:36, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:32, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Churches in Pennsylvania built in 1894

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: We don't categorize churches in the intersection of "date of completion" and "place". The lone entry in the category is already categorized in Category:Churches completed in 1894 and Category:Churches in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania as well as Category:Episcopal churches in Pennsylvania. I suspect that Category:Churches in Pennsylvania built in 1894 would never grow beyond the current one-item category. Pichpich (talk) 22:23, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Synagogues in India by century

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, many 1-3 article categories, not helpful for navigation. Even Hindu temples in India haven't been diffused by century. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:48, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Foreign nationals imprisoned in the Ottoman Empire

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:53, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, apart from Peter Heyling it is very much up to debate whether these people were really foreigners. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:01, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I would have appreciated that you'd notified me of this nomination, especially given how recently I created it. And arguably, the entire contents of Category:Prisoners of war held by the Ottoman Empire belongs as a child category. SMasonGarrison 17:05, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still think this nomination was too hasty, because I created this category on 2024-12-24. I've already found several additional people who were imprisoned, including Mary Louise Graffam, Maria Fjodorovna Zibold, Edward Joris, and William Nosworthy Churchill. SMasonGarrison 21:07, 29 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:Marriage in anime and manga

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Every other media category within Category:Works about marriage follows the template "X about marriage". This category should be renamed to follow that precedent. ThanatosApprentice (talk) 20:58, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Returns from Troy

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The category was created today, and the creator doesn't seem to have done much to populate it. How is Hector in it (via the subcategory Category:Trojan Leaders)? How is the biggest returner in literature, Odysseus, not in it? Or Agamemnon? Conversely, the category is full of people who indeed (or in some story) left Troy after it had been sacked by the Greeks, but not to return anywhere. They were Trojans, they left to seek their fortunes, and the iconic example is Aeneas. I'm thinking maybe the cat was created in some way because of the article Returns from Troy, which the creator has listed as a member of the category. But I don't see how such a category is needed, or how it at all fits the population it currently has. The subcategory Category:Trojan Leaders in particular seems quite misplaced, as Trojan leaders had nowhere to return to, AFAIK. The creator, User:Erturkardaofficial, has been asked what the category is for, but has not replied, despite being present and editing. Hopefully they will comment here. Bishonen | tålk 20:39, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1910s Brazilian film stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated stub categories with no evidence of approval by Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting. As always, stub categories are not free for just any user to create on a whim for a mere handful of articles -- the minimum size requirement for a dedicated stub category is 60 articles, so stub categories normally have to be approved for creation by the wikiproject. But none of this batch were approved, and none of them have 60 articles in them.
There are sibling categories for the 2000s and the 2010s which are over 60 articles, so I'm leaving them alone even though they technically also weren't approved -- there may be a case to be made that they don't need to exist either if the rest of these can't, but I'm not prepared to make that argument. These, however, each need at least 60 articles in them before they're warranted. Bearcat (talk) 18:49, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:British expatriates in colonial Nova Scotia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category that we really don't need. John Bazalgette's described as "army officer actively involved in the affairs of Nova Scotia ". It's unclear from the article how long he actually lived there. But he seems like a better fit for Colony of Nova Scotia people, imo. SMasonGarrison 18:34, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:British Honduras Legislative Assembly constituencies established in 1961

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category is really isolated, do we really need to have a single category for just 1961? SMasonGarrison 18:25, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:British Honduras women activists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Can we repurpose this category into the ungendered parent category? I don't see a possibility of British Honduras women activists being sufficiently populated, but maybe British Honduras activists could? Right now there's only Vivian Seay in it. SMasonGarrison 18:21, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Recipients of the National Prize of the German Democratic 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: speedy deleted per G7. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:51, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: My fault. This category is redundant to Category:Recipients of the National Prize of East Germany. Grimes2 (talk) 18:06, 28 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:Tyga compilation albums

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Sole entry is a redirect. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:39, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ian (rapper) mixtape albums

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant layer. Category:Ian (rapper) albums is otherwise empty. Upmerge sole entry. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:31, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Members of the Australian House of Representatives by term

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Not a defining category and these categories result in career politicians having far too many cats that indicate essentially the same thing. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:08, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Traumnovelle: Are you proposing the deletion of all its subcategories as well? If so, they should be tagged. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:11, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. It seemed easier to list the parent than listing 50 categories. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They might not all need to be listed here, but they should all have the {{subst:cfd}} template placed on them. I used User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/massXFD to quickly tag all the subcategories. jlwoodwa (talk) 06:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure that applies to categories. Jevansen (talk) 01:59, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jevansen: Even if I didn't miss it (which I of course did), there are still times where the principles are functionally the same, and in this case this is so. ミラP@Miraclepine 03:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's an extreme example. It's like using the categorisation of Elizabeth II as an reason to delete Category:Heads of state by country and its sub-categories; or the categorisation of Barack Obama as an reason to delete Category:American people by descent and its sub-categories. The large majority of legislators aren't included in more than a handful of legislators by term categories. We shouldn't be destroying a sensible and useful categorisation structure based on extreme examples.--Obi2canibe (talk) 16:35, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I nominated this because 8 categories were added to a politician I had watchlisted, which is just over categorisation. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:35, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious (talk) 16:12, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Muntjac

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Most other taxon categories use either the scientific name (Muntiacus for this genus) or a plural common name. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:18, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Flash television shows

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Better title for the category, to match with its subcategories. 2803:C600:8101:80DD:BC28:5B0:38B5:F109 (talk) 14:26, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Video game video content

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The are multiple concerns I have with this category: one the content being a bit of a mix bag of things, however I'm more concerned with the bizarre name for this category; I believe this current name is very unhelpful for most readers. Shouldn't the name of this category be "video game footage" or "recordings of video games" instead? The current name is honestly very off-putting and could be confused with any video on the internet related to video games; not just footage of gameplay which I clearly understand that that's what it's supposed to be for. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 06:31, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Works featuring video games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I was going to nominate this category like a month ago but forgot all about it, but I'm doing it now. Anyway, this category has bizarre trait; and potentially non-defining. No other category has a trait similar to this one (___ featuring a type of work; whatever you actually mean by that). I'll leave up to you to share your opinions on whether or not this category should be deleted. If it deleted, where else where would we categorize the article DVP (song)? QuantumFoam66 (talk) 06:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Music commissioned by the Frankfurt Radio Symphony Orchestra

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The official English name is Frankfurt Radio Symphony. Grimes2 (talk) 01:47, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 27

[edit]

Category:Podujevo

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I do not see the difference between these two cartegories. Robby (talk) 23:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WikiProject Lanka Premier League participants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The project does not exist anymore. Gonnym (talk) 09:34, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding sibling as suggested by Vestrian24Bio
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 18:05, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1975 establishments in Chattisgarh

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, Chhattisgarh exists since the year 2000 so nothing could have been established as early as 1975. It was part of Madhya Pradesh. If not merged, rename to Category:1975 establishments in Chhattisgarh because of a typo. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:3rd millennium auto races

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OVERCAT, this is unnecessarily specific. Motorsport has only been around for roughly a century, albeit one which happens to span a millenium change. Giraffer (talk) 13:58, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok maybe the title is wrong but the purpose was to have a cat for races instituted in last decade or millenium like a category 'races by decades'. I know there are no other cats categories yet, but if we go back, ho how can we grow? gtp (talk) 14:05, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Races by decade may be a useful category, but I think races by millenium is not (especially given that we're only talking about a ~100 year period). I have no idea what your last sentence means. Giraffer (talk) 14:45, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Corrected my previous reply). My idea was to have century categories XXI, XX and (maybe) XIX century: if we look far in the future wikipedia, it is a good beginning. For the same reason spanning milleniums seems overcat. but today it means 2 categories (2nd and 3rd) instead of 3 (centuries) so...I've been bold. The purpose of such bi-categorization would have some logic if we consider major endurance races were founded after prior '60s or after 2000s. Not in the middle. gtp (talk) 16:54, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Needed-Class articles

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category is empty, and I think it always will be. No WikiProjects have Needed-Class subcategories. The way to handle needed articles is to list them at WP:Requested articles. If one is created as a draft, a redirect, a disambig or a stub (or better), then each of those have their relevant Class. That is to say, if we create a page for a needed article as a redirect, then it should be in Redirect-Class, and could only be in Needed-Class if somebody manually added it there as well.
I considered just renaming the category from articles to pages, as this is currently an exception among the non-article classes listed at WP:Assess. As soon as it's an article, then it's a stub or better. But if it's not an article, them it must be one of the other classes e.g. redirect. So, it's not needed.
WP:ASSESS gives the example of Free City Of Mainz as of 2018, but that has since been written, and was a redirect then. "Needed-Class" does not seem to have been discussed on the talk page of that project page since 2009, when talk pages were allowed in isolation. ≤
Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_April_14#Category:Needed-Class_articles was closed as Keep, but that was when projects had Needed-Class subcats. Category:Needed-Class former country articles was deleted under WP:G6 by Explicit in Oct 2023, apparently after this template edit by MSGJ to "use standard extended scale".
Interwiki links show that 3 other Wikipedias currently have this category, but only one (Chinese) has anything within it, and that's just 3 empty topical subcats.
If deletion is approved, this should be listed on the CFD/W/Manual page, as various templates will need to be amended. – Fayenatic London 14:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Women's firsts in the film industry

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: or Merge with Category:Women film pioneers. Very vague category parameters. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:15, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Baseball players from Fayette County, Texas

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:17, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:16, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Novels by theme

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: See longer explanation at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Games#"Theme"_category_problem_started_by_Category:Games_by_genre_or_theme. This is the least controversial (if anything is). It is subcat to Category:Fiction books by topic, there is no Category:Themes or 'by themes' anywhere except in few instances I pointed out in the linked analysis; all themes should be rename to topics since we have a cat tree for topics, not themes. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:23, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • PS. I did not notice the target already exists. Well, merge instead of renaming then, I guess. Duplicate concept. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:25, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just delete, most subcategories are already in Category:Novels about interpersonal relationships which is a subcategory of Category:Novels by topic. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:47, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I'm looking at the two category trees, and at Theme (narrative), and I'm wondering if perhaps we should be looking at a reverse merge. I agree that we don't need both trees. I think the prevailing term for these is theme, rather than topic. And maybe that will help remove the inaccurate usage of "x and genre" named categories as well. All that said, having Works with X themes opens up to really broad categories, because, using novels as an example, the "theme" could be be due to a mere sentence, a paragraph, a chapter, or throughout the book. I'm not sure how to best resolve that. The difficulty, of course is that we're at the whim of the author's free usage of whatever themes they may decide to toss into a work, regardless of whether it furthers the overall plot (or narrative structure), or not. It would be nice if we could standardize all of the subcats into Works about X. At least that makes it (sort of) clear that it's about the the entire work than merely parts of it. Anyone else have any thoughts on these? Maybe we can come up with a standard for going forward. - jc37 21:09, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jc37 Are you suggesting we should rename everything in Category:Works by topic to Category:Works by theme? That would be much more work than what I suggested in the linked discussion (where I propose to rename the very few theme categories to topic categories). Might be best to discuss it there? I don't have a preference, to be honest, except I want to see standardized terminology, and it seems theme and topic mean the same thing here. But yes, I see your point that a work can have one topic but more than one theme, but is it really that clear? I am pretty sure many entities are categorized as having multiple themes. Ex. Wolfenstein 3D has cats related to 'Adolf Hitler', 'Experimental medical treatments', 'WW2' and 'Nazi Germany'. Those all seem like topics/themes to me (although the category trees are somewhat convoluted...). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:44, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment, I am ok with either topic or theme, it's more important that the subcategories are consistently called "about". Marcocapelle (talk) 10:13, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure whether topic or theme is better, both have their plusses and minuses. So for now, I'll agree with the above that that's probably a bigger discussion, and so, for now, supporting these heading to the already-existing topic tree. And yes, definitely, the subcats should be standardized to "Works about X" - so in this case, "Novels about X". - jc37 23:26, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 26

[edit]

Category:12th-century Burmese poets

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Duel merge this isolated underpopulated category. SMasonGarrison 22:08, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:12th-century Algerian poets

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This category is isolated, with only one person it in. Notably, there isn't a Category:12th-century Algerian people SMasonGarrison 21:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cathedrals in fiction

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename and re-parent, all articles are about creative works. The proposed name aligns with Category:Works set in churches. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:34, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional religious places

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article in here and it's already better categorized elsewhere. It is unlikely to be filled with enough articles to justify a category (and flooding it with redirects would be bad form and duplicate the organization at Category:Church buildings in fiction). Jontesta (talk) 18:19, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ambassadors of Costa Rica to Czechoslovakia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Also merge with Category:Ambassadors to Czechoslovakia LibStar (talk) 17:27, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Syrian Kurdish feminists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This is an underpopulated category with only one person in it. SMasonGarrison 13:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Baseball players from Edwards County, Texas

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 13:48, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fiction about monsters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename similar to other subcategories in Category:Legendary creatures in popular culture. Also: remove Category:speculative fiction by topic as a parent category. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:34, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Future decades in mass media and film

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. No need to merge somewhere, the content is already part of e.g. Category:Fiction set in the 2030s. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:19, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Until some film release dates are scheduled for the 2030s, these categories are useless beyond the setting categories. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:06, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Writing systems by century

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, poorly populated categories, this way it is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:32, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Not many writing systems exist. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:06, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Schwartz family (television)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Similar to Category:Roberts family (journalism) and Category:Dacre family (journalism), this category is all journalists and can be more specific. Mike Selinker (talk) 06:12, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pyne banking family

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To match Category:Stern family (banking) and Category:Mack family (banking). (Not quite enough to make this Speedy.) Mike Selinker (talk) 06:08, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jacobs family (telecom)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is a subcategory of Category:Telecommunications company families so "telecom" should be spelled out. Mike Selinker (talk) 06:04, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Audiovisual introductions

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, isolated single-article categories, unhelpful for navigation. A second merge target isn't really necessary, two articles are already in Category:Precursors of film and for the other articles it is quite a stretch to say that they are about audiovisual technology. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 18 December 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, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Analog Drum Machine

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I don't work with categories much, so I have no opinion about whether this category is needed at all. However, if we're going to keep it, it should be renamed "Analog drum machines" (sentence case, plural) for consistency with category names per WP:CATNAME. Popcornfud (talk) 20:34, 18 December 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 02:22, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:17th-century Lithuanian philosophers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Isolated category. Upmerge for now. SMasonGarrison 21:28, 18 December 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 02:22, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Biography articles without living parameter

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The living parameter of {{WikiProject Biography}} has been merged with the blp parameter in {{WikiProject banner shell}}, so the title of this category is no longer accurate. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:11, 18 December 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 02:22, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. Do not capitalize because the actual parameter name is all lowercase. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:10, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename/merge as per nom, as it makes more sense to align with the parameter name. -Kj cheetham (talk) 12:55, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Harryboyles 06:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mata'utia family (rugby)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: All Mata'utia people with articles are in this category, so I don't think we need a disambiguator. If we do, it should be Category:Mata'utia family (rugby league) because it's a subcategory of Category:Rugby league families. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:14, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename Disambiguation without a base title. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:09, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Child family (English bankers)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There's no other Child family in the banking business, so I think we should match all the other subcategories of category:Banking families that need disambiguators. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:10, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Easmon family (Sierra Leone)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Everyone on Easmon is in this category, so I don't think we need the disambiguator here. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:07, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chandler family (newspaper publishers)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There are no other Chandler family categories, so this could just be Category:Chandler family. But if it needs a disambiguator then it should be "publishing" to match this nomination. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:04, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pulitzer family (newspapers)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There aren't any other Pulitzer family categories. Alternatively, we can rename to Category:Pulitzer family (publishing) per this discussion, but there doesn't seem to be much need for disambiguation here. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Pulitzer family as disambiguation without a base title. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More show business families

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per this discussion and all other subcategories of Category:Show business families. Mike Selinker (talk) 01:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


December 25

[edit]

Category:Languages attested from 1964

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete and merge. Delete Category:Languages attested from 1964

Merging Category:Constructed languages introduced in 1964 to Category:1964 introductions and Category:Constructed languages introduced in the 1960s (non-admin closure) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:24, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Another single-article category. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:24, 25 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:Brazilian people of Algerian-Jewish descent

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Yet another single-article category by ethnicity and nationality. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:00, 25 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:Brazilian people of Igbo descent

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Main article does not exist, and there is only one article in the category. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:56, 25 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:Wikipedians in Scouts India

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 1#Category:Wikipedians in Scouts India


Category:Fantasy by 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: delete (non-admin closure). ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is the same thing with the related sci-fi categories. The only two subcategories of this category do not commemorate to the title of this category; wouldn't it be a category for "Fictional things in fantasy worlds by franchise" rather instead? Anyway I cannot see this category being kept. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 19:16, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. It's kinda redundant when media franchises have a genre, a mangling of Category:Fantasy franchises. Contents are Category:Fictional universe of Harry Potter and Category:Middle-earth objects. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:47, 25 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:Science fiction by 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: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I just removed some pages in this category and at the moment, this category has shrunk drastically, become redundant and conflicts with the similar category of Category:Science fiction franchises. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 19:06, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Remaining content is Category:Fictional technology by work, which is two levels below Category:Science fiction themes. @QuantumFoam66: Which subcategories did you remove, and why? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:50, 25 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:Mongolian footballers by populated place

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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:Mongolian footballers. (non-admin closure) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one subcategory. No need to merge. Lost in Quebec (talk) 18:26, 25 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:Brazilian people of African descent by ethnicity

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary level of intermediate categorization between Category:Brazilian people of African descent and just two subcategories for African ethnic groups. Both of the two subcategories here are already in Category:Brazilian people of Nigerian descent, meaning they're already appropriately subcategorized within that parent and thus need neither this nor upmerging to the parent. (One of the two subcategories, Category:Brazilian people of Igbo descent, also only has one person in it, and thus may not even be warranted at all if it can't be made more populated than it is. However, I'm just raising it for review, rather than nominating it for deletion here and now, as I don't know whether getting more articles into it is actually possible or not — but I will say that the fact that it's linking an Igbo Brazilians article that doesn't even exist at all as its purported "main article" head isn't promising.) Bearcat (talk) 14:47, 25 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:Social media influencers

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. Thorough discussion; unlikely a WP:RELIST will help. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:10, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, not a clear distinction between the two categories. This is follow-up on this discussion which is still open. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:31, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Smasongarrison, Hydrangeans, and The Bushranger: pinging participants to the other discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:00, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose merge, and oppose deletion. Thanks for the ping. Note the first sentence in the Influencer article states, An influencer, also referred to as an online influencer and social media influencer, is a term traditionally associated with someone who is considered influential., while the first sentence in the Internet celebrity article states, An internet celebrity, also referred to as an internet personality, is an individual who has acquired or developed their fame and notability on the Internet. The point here is that not all influencers are celebrities, e.g., LinkedIn influencers, etc. That said, if you haven't already, please ping and invite the folks at Wikipedia:WikiProject Internet culture to be part of the discussion on this topic as they're the gurus... allowing enough time after the holidays for a response. Thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:21, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge - while it is true that "not all influencers are celebrities" - or should be, at least - the fact is that even LinkedIn influencers are pretty much celebrities at this point, and in common useage the terms have become synonomous. Language evolves, for better or for worse, and this is a case where it has - and our categorization should evolve along with it. Also I'm amused that Firefox's spellchecker doesn't even recognize "influencer" as a word! - The Bushranger One ping only 20:04, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose merge (and, in case it is brought up, oppose deletion). As I explained in Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_December_24#Category:American_social_media_influencers, these categories are not indistinguishable. "Influencer" carries a more specific connotation of trendsetting, especially in the realm of purchasing decisions, e.&nbps;g., vloggers plugging their Stanley drinking tumblers, Instagrammers recommending articles of clothing, YouTubers using sponsored props etc. That's not a connotation that readily connotes a documentarian like Kevin Perjurer of Defunctland, or an education podcaster like Michael Sugrue; I don't really see "influencer" as the point of overlap between such folks and Mr. Beast. Retaining Category:Social media influencers therefore remains useful. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:56, 27 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 Doubravice nad Svitavou

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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) 22:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:07, 25 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.

2100s and 2110s

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 1#2100s and 2110s

Category:Deaths from cerebrovascular disease

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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) 22:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: containerize, the articles directly in this category are usually about people who died by stroke, which is a far too common cause of death to categorize by. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:31, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support containerizing. It's definitely helpful for navigation. SMasonGarrison 16:59, 25 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.

Leftover mosques categories

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 12#Mosques 1200-1900; three single-member categories which were inadvertently excluded from the list. BlasterOfHouses (HouseBlaster's alt • talk • he/they) 06:43, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Cestidae

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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) 23:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Cestida is a monotypic order, containing only the family Cestidae. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:35, 25 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:Deceased Everest summiters

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Selective merge. These are just summiters who are now deceased. For example, Rick Allen (mountaineer) died on K2. Gary Ball died on Dhaulagiri. SMasonGarrison 01:52, 25 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 on Scottish mountains

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the 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) 22:56, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: From looking at the deaths, these are all Mountaineering deaths. Sibling is Category:Mountaineering deaths in Nepal. This is boardline CDC SMasonGarrison 01:47, 25 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.

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://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/All_current_discussions&oldid=1255390992#Current_discussions"