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 15:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 112 open requests (refresh).

Current requests

[edit]

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

Opposed requests

[edit]

On hold pending other discussion

[edit]

Moved to full discussion

[edit]

Current discussions

[edit]
Shortcut

October 14

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:Amirov brothers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I don't see the point of such a small category for navigating between two people. The article on one brother points to the other brother, and vice versa. Geschichte (talk) 07:38, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Joseon scholar-officials

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I think we should split this category, as a non-defining intersection. There's no parent scholar-officials Mason (talk) 02:44, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pitcairn Islands people convicted of rape

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I think we should broaden this category because there's no parent category Pitcairn Islands criminals, and I think that creating a parent category right now would just be redudant Mason (talk) 01:04, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the category is legitimate, although there are questions about what categories it should be under. I now think it shouldn't be under "British people convicted of rape" because people from the British Overseas Territories aren't classified as British people on Wikipedia, there are various categories relating to these territories. PatGallacher (talk) 13:52, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]



October 13

[edit]

Category:German abbesses

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Oppose. I was indifferent. My inclination would be to upmerge Category:German Christian abbesses to Category:German abbesses , but I don't feel strongly about it. However, now that I've looked closer, I've realized that there were several other categories in here. I've reverted the changes where Marco placed Category:10th-century German abbesses, Category:11th-century German abbesses into German Christian abbesses. Mason (talk) 18:34, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • That does not make sense. All German abbesses of these centuries were abbesses of Christian monasteries. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:47, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that you weren't transparent that you moved the categories deeper into the tree. You could have argued that the categories overlap, which is a reasonable argument. However that's not what you nominated here; you said that the category was a redundant. The category is called Category:11th-century German abbesses, not Category:11th-century German Christian abbesses. Mason (talk) 00:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Free compilers and interpreters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category:Compilers and interpreters is basically a hybrid of Category:Compilers and Category:Interpreters (computing). The overwhelming majority of articles only fit in one category, and the few that don't can be in both categories. Category:Free compilers and interpreters should be split into two new categories for the same reason. I also propose adding "open source" to the names of the new categories, since that's what the current category is being used for, and just "free" is vague. Zerbu 💬 13:09, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on jlwoodwa's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:51, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bantu

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Bantu does not have a primary topic so a better title for this category should be used. Maybe Bantu (culture)? Open to suggestions. Gonnym (talk) 13:57, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on downmerging?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:MP's for High Peak

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: For consistency with similar categories such as Category:Members of the Parliament of the United Kingdom for Derby. Dave.Dunford (talk) 17:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle: Thanks. Is it worth me withdrawing and renominating or shall I let it take its course? The guidelines for renaming a Wikipedia category (which I've not done before) are not clear. Dave.Dunford (talk) 09:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:List of gangs in Belgium

[edit]
Convert Category:List of gangs in Belgium to article List of gangs in Belgium
Nominator's rationale: Please advise if this is the wrong way to handle it when discovering a list article that was created in category space. DB1729talk 17:30, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I think this is a perfectly reasonable, and creative use of CFD. Mason (talk) 00:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bohemian royal saints

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Already Deleted. (non-admin closure) Mason (talk) 00:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Self-requested deletion of empty category Векочел (talk) 15:42, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:City of Albany, Western Australia

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Mason (talk) 00:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Bring in line with the parent article, City of Albany. Calistemon (talk) 15:15, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw, just noticed that this was rejected in March 2021 (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 February 11) after previously being proposed by me. Calistemon (talk) 15:19, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Nazi war crimes against children

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I suggest removing "war" from the title. I recently wrote Nazi crimes against children and I did not notice the term war crime used often. Some items discussed in my article, like Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany. Now, we could argue that the current category is a subcat of the one I propose, but I am not sure if the sources really support existence of both, and if splitting Nazi war crimes against children from Nazi crimes against children makes much sense. To make things more confusing, category wise, Child euthanasia in Nazi Germany (article), a concept which predates WWII, is a child of the nominated category through the Children in the Holocaust intermedia category. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:59, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, not that I think a name change is necessary, but I'm fine with it if you want to match the article title to it. AHI-3000 (talk) 06:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Arrowverse character redirects

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

Category:Current justices of the Supreme Court of the United States

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

Category:Wikipedia pages with colour accessibility problems

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: How is this page different from Category:Wikipedia articles with colour accessibility problems. The template might need to be fixed. {{cleanup colors}} Mason (talk) 01:59, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should merge it the other way instead, since all articles are pages and not all pages are articles. The pages category includes templates. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 02:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Slavery by war

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The contents of this category seem to be related to wars about slavery rather than a category that breaks down Slavery by individual wars Mason (talk) 01:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I meant to keep this category separate from Category:Slavery during wars to keep the supercategory more focused on the subject of wartime slavery in general. AHI-3000 (talk) 02:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pages with accessibility problems

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant to Category:Accessibility issue tracking categories (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Accessibility_issue_tracking_categories) SomeoneDreaming (talk) 01:40, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. This should be merged to Category:Accessibility issue tracking categories, otherwise the child category will be isolated. Mason (talk) 01:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Noblewomen in the Holy Roman Empire

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This was opposed at speedy. C2C: parent is Nobility of the Holy Roman Empire and the norm is of, instead of from. (I'm equally fine with Noblewomen from the Holy Roman Empire) Mason (talk) 01:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of speedy discussion
Pinging contributor @Johnpacklambert:Mason (talk) 01:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 12

[edit]

Category:British music logos

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Limited scope (contains just one entry and one subcat) with likely limited expansion. Exists without an established Category:Music logos tree that also seems too limited to exist. Upmerge to Category:British logos. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Yachtracing-stub

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

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

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

Category:Critics of veganism

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OPINIONCAT. Web-julio (talk) 05:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not a defining of these articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:09, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both, because OPINIONCAT isn't really applicable here. They are not characterized simply because of a non-defining like or dislike, but because of a position that they hold. In that regard, there is no functional difference between someone who recommends veganism/vegetarianism, versus someone who recommends against it, so long as there is sufficient sourcing that the person has made significant commentary to that effect. If there are pages about people for whom it is a minor aspect of their views, so as not to be defining, that should be addressed by cleanup of the categories, rather than by deleting the categories entirely. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:37, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Tryptofish's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Centuries in Landskrona‎

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: manually merge, most articles don't belong in a history category but rather in e.g. a buildings and structures category. The articles that do belong in a history category are so few that they can easily put together in a single category. For reference: only 5 of the biggest world cities have their own 15th century category next to Landskrona. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Category:21st century by city has a lot of city categories. Leaning Oppose. Gonnym (talk) 12:30, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Women local politicans

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Change to Fooian/Xian per parents. --MikutoH talk! 04:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the comments by Mason and Marcocapelle?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:59, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Israeli insurance brokers

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

Category:Graph algorithms

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Needs to be called either that or Category:Graph (discrete mathematics) algorithms, per graph (discrete mathematics) and WP:C2D. The latter seems more awkward, though. 1234qwer1234qwer4 11:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copy of speedy discussion

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

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

Category:FL-Class cricket articles of Mid-importance

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: According to WikiProject Cricket's assessment scheme, All lists (including FLs) are assessed as Low-Importance only. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 17:21, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Same for,
Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 17:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cricket articles by review

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There are no A-class articles within the project's scope; apart from that the project banner doesn't even has the A-class review parameters anymore. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 15:50, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also the following which are no longer used by the banner shell anymore as well.
Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 17:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Medieval German LGBTQ people

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: withdrawn. Thank you Bearcat for knowing what to do here. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 (T·C) 16:07, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Moving this category out of the ordinal-century format broke its tranclusion of {{LGBTQ people by nationality and century category header}}. The code of the underlying template is quite complex and inflexible, and I doubt this error could be fixed without radical alterations. I don't believe it desirable to undertake that, especially when it is unclear to me how renaming the category actually addressed the original concern that this category is unhelpful for navigation. Pinging previous discussion's participants HouseBlaster, Bearcat, Marcocapelle, and Smasongarrison. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 14:32, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The transclusion problem was very easily solved by untranscluding the "broken" header template, and simply filing the category directly in appropriate parent categories instead of doing that via a transcluded header template. That's not a radical solution at all, as it's an entirely normal way of including categories in parent categories — we can use header templates instead of directly transcluded categories where they're useful and fit the circumstances, but there's no rule that we must always use header templates instead of directly transcluded categories, and no rule that a category is inherently invalid just because its parentage doesn't suit a header template. Note also the existence of siblings for Category:Medieval French LGBTQ people and Category:Medieval Italian LGBTQ people, and of a parent Category:Medieval LGBTQ people, all of which suggest that this is both an acceptable and expected category. Bearcat (talk) 14:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep. The whole point of the category header is that its only supposed to be used on a very specific kind of category. Thanks Bearcat for making the fix. Mason (talk) 15:02, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

(LGBT identity) fiction

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

Category:Anti-LGBTQ Pentecostal activists in the United States

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

Category:Volleyball players from Izmir

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

Category:All Elite Wrestling personnel

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This should not be a category because AEW roster is not permanent. Also, both List of All Elite Wrestling personnel and Template:All Elite Wrestling cover the current roster. A similar category was deleted in July 2024. See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 14#Category:WWE wrestlers for the details. Mann Mann (talk) 08:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Upper class culture in Maryland

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Mostly consists of various localities and neighbourhoods. Not clear how that constitutes "upper class culture". AusLondonder (talk) 05:34, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Armenian scholars of constitutional law

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

Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon X and Y

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

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

Oppose This is a very bold move out of complete nowhere given that the vast bulk of these categories are perfectly valid navigational tools. The Sword and Shield category in particular contains five articles, while the bulk of the others contain around four or so articles, which are sizeable numbers when collected as a group. Merging all of these sub-categories back to the main category would clutter said category with twenty-three additional articles, and when the total Pokémon species category is covering nearly sixty articles, all of which have valid ways of better organizing them, a merge back would be detrimental for both navigational and practical purposes and be overall unwieldy for covering this subject effectively. I feel a merge would be unwise, and support keeping the bulk of these split.
As an aside, I did mean to discuss the Ruby and Sapphire and Sun and Moon categories when it wasn't midnight in my time zone, but given that this is being brought to the forefront now, I'll bring up my gripes: Both of these categories I feel definitely have room for expansion, but do not have enough articles to justify a split for the time being, in my mind. I wished to discuss this with other editors who I was aware had projects that would fall under these categories in order to resolve this matter further, but this discussion has thrown a wrench in that. Additinally, with Ruby and Sapphire in particular, I did also wish to discuss that I'm admittedly unsure if Regi (Pokémon) should be included within the category, and not just the redirects, given the overarching group was introduced in those games, which could potentially allow for a better justification of RS's sub-category. For the time being I am unable to discuss this as effectively with the categories being suddenly brought to deletion, but I would appreciate the nominator's insight on this, and my other points, as a whole, without a volley of deletion discussions being brought in as a retort. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:35, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, I was the one who created Ruby and Sapphire and Sun and Moon categories, so I admit that I thought these would be fine, but since you brought the other one for debate, maybe these would also be against policies or what CfD participants think of. So I'm open to comments. And they can be recreated, but where's the line and what would be the criteria for such inclusion/category creation next time?
Because, 5 isn't even a big number overall for general categories. And WP:SMALLCAT says [...] will never have more than a few members, [...], which is not the case, they will eventually be bigger. Web-julio (talk) 05:31, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - WP:SMALLCAT was deprecated in 2023. (Oinkers42) (talk) 11:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have always considered 4, occasionally 3, to be the minimum number of articles for a category to be useful. Many categories exist with four articles. These Pokémon categories are useful enough to stay, while the Gen 6 one is not because there are fewer articles. If more Gen 6 Pokémon get articles, we can bring it back. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge. The game they were introduced in is not a defining trait, since they often appear in every subsequent game, even live in multiple regions. The above comments are largely votes with no basis in policy, besides the comment of Pokelego, which argues they are "valid navigational tools" (technically every category is, that doesn't mean it follows the guidelines). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon X and Y

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category only contains one item that has an article. The main Pokémon species category is not overly cluttered, and thus this sub-category is not necessary and better off deleted for the time being. Should more X and Y Pokémon get articles, I am unopposed to future recreation, but for the time being it is not necessary and has no immediate use in the near future. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment at the time of nomination, this only contained Klefki. It now contains the generation VI list, Klefki, and a large number of redirects. My same argument still applies here; two subjects are not enough for a subcategory when the main category is not suffering from clutter as-is, and is overall unnecessary. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:55, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You nominated it while I was populating. Anyways, you created Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Gold and Silver, which only contains three articles and the list. The same happens with Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Scarlet and Violet by QuicoleJR and Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Sword and Shield by Cukie Gherkin (recently, redirects were put in this one). Based on these, I also created Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire and Category:Pokémon species introduced in Pokémon Sun and Moon, in which each one contains only two articles plus list and three/two redirects. So, all of these are debatable, and I'm sure many people here on CfD would vote them all of these for upmerge. Web-julio (talk) 04:10, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your argument against this category being deleted is that other categories should also be deleted? That's a fairly bizarre argument. In any case, the other categories, while fringe, do provide some navigational utility given four articles would be better off sub-categorized compared to two. Including all of those groups of four and above in the main category would be unwieldy; they're better off organized for the sake of cleanliness and readability. Two articles is nowhere near enough to provide potential category organization issues, and the plethora of redirects are not proper articles, especially when many of them are redirecting to topics often discussed only in brief in the parent article.
While the RS and SM categories may be iffy in a similar vein, this discussion is pertaining strictly to the XY category, and per Wikipedia:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, this is not a point we need to worry about for this discussion. I'm admittedly still considering the former two and wish to discuss them further outside of the scope of a CfD as well. For now though, I feel as though this sub-cat still isn't serving a valid navigational or practical benefit, and would likely need at least a few more fully fledged articles before a sub-cat like this would be beneficial for navigational or practical purposes. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:24, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: WP:OTHERCATSEXIST says: an appeal to "Other similar category schemes don't – and shouldn't – exist" may be an appropriate argument for arguing for deletion of a category.. Web-julio (talk) 05:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And you missed the point in commenting about other categories, because I didn't mention Red and Blue, for example, I indeed assessed the current state of the others, which is precarious as well. Web-julio (talk) 05:41, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Huh, didn't know there was a separate exception for categories. Then ignore my OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, as it's not relevant to this discussion.
In any case, I didn't bring up Red and Blue either, and I wasn't arguing anything related to it, so I'm a bit confused about how this relates to my prior arguments. I argued that the current sub-categories were fine for categorical purposes, and that the XY one specifically was not, and you saying "I disagree" doesn't really answer my arguments at all, unless I'm wildly misinterpreting what you're saying here. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 16:24, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - Regardless of any other categories that may exist, 2 articles is still too few for a useful category in my eyes. Let us leave any other potential categories to a different discussion (like the one currently above, for instance). (Oinkers42) (talk) 11:34, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now. X and Y have a rather limited pool and even among people working on these articles it feels like there's very unlikely to be any articles spun out unlike the other games. While I understand the need to subcategorize, even projects like WP:SE don't have a subcategory for every Final Fantasy title, as some of them just don't have enough content (case in point, the Final Fantasy V category was only remade her very recently, after the list was recreated). No prejudice if this situation changes at a later time.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:01, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:SpaceX astronauts

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

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

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

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

Category:British patrolwomen

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

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

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

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

@Necrothesp: Thoughts on the above? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine by me. There are probably enough of them. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tourist attractions in Salem

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

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

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

Category:11th-century Somali people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Opposed for speedy.C2C: parent is Somalian people by century, but @Marcocapelle: makes good points that "Category:Ethnic Somali people and the country Somalia did not exist yet in the 11th and 12th century. " Mason (talk) 23:16, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a bit problematic because there is also Category:Ethnic Somali people and the country Somalia did not exist yet in the 11th and 12th century. On top of that it is unclear whether Somalian would include or exclude current Somaliland. So I think it is better to re-parent these categories, move them from the Somalian to the Ethnic Somali tree. Also rename the 13th to 19th century categories to "Somali". For example in the 13th century category there is someone in the Maldives who was probably an ethnic Somali. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:48, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that they should either be renamed per above or merged to Category:Ethnic Somali people and 10th-century African people/11th-century African people. Mason (talk) 22:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Members of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre

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

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

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

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

Category:Solent_University (and sub-categories)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The university has changed its name and the alumni category link on the wikipedia page has been incorrectly updated, so is currently going to a blank category page Mystery Cat (talk) 15:07, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean a Blank Category page? Mason (talk) 21:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies. I mean a category page which hasn't been created yet - they changed the name in the link without checking if that category existed. It's 'see also' at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southampton_Solent_University#Notable_alumni Mystery Cat (talk) 09:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: None of these were tagged; I will do so now. I will note that on Wikipedia, Example page and Example_page are equivalent (just like Example page and example page are equivalent).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:59, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NCT Wish albums

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Two redirects which are articles already in Category:NCT Wish songs. Information provided in the song articles do not further elaborate on the single albums to justify both albums and songs categories. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 03:55, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait some discussion needs to happen elsewhere as to whether the two articles should be reclassified as "single albums" rather than just "single" - I believe for consistency sake they should probably be migrated to the “single album” format which would be valid for this category.
Either way, the artist has an EP being released in about 5 hours that will inevitably have an article created in the extremely near future (within hours) that will belong in this category which could change the direction of this deletion discussion before the nomination can run its course. No point in going through a week worth of deletion discussion if by the end of it the nomination rationale that all the votes are based upon will no longer be valid. RachelTensions (talk) 04:10, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Steady (NCT Wish EP) has now been created and added to the category. There are now multiple articles using this category. RachelTensions (talk) 08:06, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Two redirects and a subcategory as of relisting. Is this enough to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:17, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Riize

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only album articles which are already sufficiently categorized in an albums subcategory for the group. This is an unnecessary eponymous parent per WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 03:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
CATMAIN does not provide any rationale for keeping eponymous categories but simply provides instructions on how to categorize articles within an eponymous category should one exist. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 05:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The new subcat are just image files, which would already be placed in individual articles, and the group would be more defining to SM Rookies than the other way around. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There have been 4 subcats added to the root category: Category:Riize songs, Category:Riize EPs, Category:Riize album covers, and Category:Riize audio samples. RachelTensions (talk) 05:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another article was just created & added. RachelTensions (talk) 06:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 October 4#Category:Riize.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:19, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I neglected to ping people. Relisting this time with a ping.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lostwave

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: "Lostwave" is basically an ill-defined currently trendy Internet term that refers to music of unknown origins, which can also refer to completely lost works such as Ready 'n' Steady, or songs that are only known based on fragments, which seems to be the most common as listed on the page. While it is definitely "real" insofar its a term people use and there is something of a community around it, the fact it isn't clearly defined to begin with, and almost completely overlaps with "Lost musical works", "Rediscovered musical works" or "Works of unknown authorship" doesn't really make it suitable as a category. Iostn (talk) 22:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Distinct phenomenon from lost musical works, which are pieces and recordings of music which secondary sources can attest existed at one point, but no longer do. Support renaming to Music of unknown origin, which unlike the trendy "Lostwave" is a time-tested phrase in academia. DigitalIceAge (talk) 19:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the rename proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's an improvement over the present name. Mason (talk) 22:26, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 11

[edit]

Category:Israel Prize in social sciences recipients who were economists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection User:Namiba 17:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ships build by George Brown and Company

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: typo in title Davidships (talk) 13:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Apartheid States

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is an odd category that does not meet WP:SUBJECTIVECAT, and depending on which subjectivity is used will likely also fail WP:NARROWCAT. There are currently five entries (Bantustan, Confederate States of America, Rhodesia, Union of South Africa, and South West Africa), and it is unclear what the inclusion criteria for that diverse mix of articles is meant to be. All entries have issues. The Union of South Africa is where apartheid developed, but only towards the end, and most of apartheid history took place after the establishment of a Republic. South West Africa did have an apartheid system throughout its history, but it was not a state. Those are the key polities covered in the Apartheid article. The concept of Bantustans was a product of apartheid, but it sounds very odd for the bantustans to be described as "Apartheid states". I could see an academic paper creating a meaning for the label that would work, but that is far too specific for a category. Rhodesia and the Confederate States of America had severe racial discrimination, but not apartheid systems. I don't see how the category could be defined in a way that would add value to a reading of the Apartheid article. CMD (talk) 10:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:42, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Honor

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To match main article Honour. Opposed last month at CFDS. AusLondonder (talk) 09:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Working-class culture in Baltimore

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category is mostly populated with neighborhoods. It's not clear exactly what makes a piece of culture "working-class" and how we draw the line, and it's not the normal way we organize categories. Sdkb talk 04:27, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I recently saw Category:Upper class culture in Maryland which again mostly consists of neighbourhoods and wasn't sure it was appropriate. AusLondonder (talk) 09:29, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Singaporean case law by topic

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer Mason (talk) 03:36, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shooting coaches by nationality

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer with only one nationality in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 01:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comedy directors

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: While we're talking about directors versus actors, I feel the same principles as those outlined in WP:PERFCAT, and which resulted in the deletion of multiple "comedy actors" categories[1] may apply here. DonIago (talk) 14:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose American comedy film directors & British comedy film directors, which diffuse American film directors & British film directors, respectively.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  14:16, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • If these need to go, then the parent Category:Comedy film directors (which you haven't tagged as part of this) also needs to go. I'm not wedded to the need for it, but there's absolutely no argument to be had that the parent is fine and only the subcategories are a problem: if it's fine, then subcategories for countries with a large enough number of entries are automatically fair game under it, and there can be absolutely no serious argument that only the subcategories are a problem if the parent isn't. There additionally can't be any serious argument that the US and the UK should get subcategories but Canada shouldn't, either — national subcategories aren't applied on any basis more refined or subjective than "has enough entries to support one", so there can't be a serious argument that American and British directors should get subcategories while Canadian ones shouldn't. So either we need to delete the parent category as well, or they all have to stay. Bearcat (talk) 14:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    With all due respect, I don't see any suggestion here that I might have simply overlooked the existence of some categories that should be included here. You're welcome to add those in if you feel they should be part of the conversation. Please assume good faith. Do you have an argument other than, "Why are some categories included but related categories missing?" DonIago (talk) 14:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    With all due respect, the non-inclusion of directly related categories that are subject to the same issues as the included categories is a relevant and germane point in a CFD discussion. There's simply no reason why these should all be deleted at the same time as the parent Category:Comedy film directors being kept — if the parent is acceptable, then national subcategories for countries with a large-enough number of entries for them are inherently acceptable as well, and if the national subcategories aren't warranted then the parent category isn't warranted either — and any person in any of these categories could simply be readded to the parent category at will by any editor at any time, which would inevitably be followed by these categories getting recreated because the parent category had become large enough to need diffusion into subcategories again (which is the reason why these even exist in the first place: because the parent category existed and needed diffusion). So my point stands, and I will brook no further clapback about it — it's not my job to add related categories to this discussion, it's your job to either add the related category or explain why you think it's different. Bearcat (talk) 16:17, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    How very collaborative of you. I'll add the additional categories shortly. DonIago (talk) 16:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, WP:PERFCAT is about specific shows in which subjects participate. That is quite different than genre, which we are discussing here. Frankly I think diffusion by genre is more relevant than by location (which is also being done in this tree, at least in the US). Marcocapelle (talk) 17:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I guess I'm not sure I see the practical difference, in this case, regarding whether we're talking about categorizing actors by genre versus categorizing directors by genre? I realize categories are generally inclusive rather than exclusive (i.e. just because a director directed comedies and is categorized as such doesn't mean they didn't also direct in other film genres), but the same could be said about the actor categories as well. TL;DR why would "actors by genre" be bad but "directors by genre" not be bad? You say that PERFCAT is about specific shows, but in the CfD that I linked to the consensus appears to have been that genre does constitute a type of performance. I'm also, as I was with the prior CfD, concerned that we risk opening the door to creating multiple additional "Director by genre"-style categories. Is it really a defining characteristic in most cases (I'm genuinely asking here; my instinct is that most directors have directed films from various genres, but maybe I'm wrong)? ETA: I do see that we do have "Film directors by genre"...I'm going to keep the scope of this limited rather than make it all-inclusive at this time, as a test case. DonIago (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Summer camps in fiction

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

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

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

Category:Over the Hedge video games

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

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

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


October 10

[edit]

Category:Malagasy masculine given names

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only one. Can EASILY be combined into main cat. Roasted (talk) 23:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Straggler LGBT categories

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Categories which lack the Q; rename per Talk:LGBTQ#Requested move 14 August 2024, WP:CONSUB, WP:C2C, and WP:C2D. Similar renames have been opposed at CFDS, so I am starting a full discussion. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 18:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT articles by importance

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: speedy delete. I forgot about WP:C4. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 18:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: {{WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies}} does not actually take an |importance= parameter. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 18:47, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Shopping centres in Stirling (council area)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single category, unhelpful for navigation. Also merge to Category:Buildings and structures in Stirling (council area) AusLondonder (talk) 12:29, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:African aviators

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There are no other aviators by continent categories (unless you want to count Category:Australian aviators). The other option is to create them and diffuse Category:Aviators by nationality. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retain: What is done for one continent does not have to be done identically for all other continents, no such requirement. Very few aviators from Africa are the subjects of an article. This makes this category more notable. Pete unseth (talk) 12:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. If kept then I suggest create a Category:Aviators by continent and make for other continents as well. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shopping malls in Sharjah

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Contains a single article and is unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 11:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shopping malls in Ankara

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Contains a single article and is unhelpful for navigation. Merge also to Category:Buildings and structures in Ankara. AusLondonder (talk) 11:45, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shopping malls in Al Rayyan

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Contains a single article and is unhelpful for navigation. Merge also to Category:Al Rayyan. AusLondonder (talk) 11:29, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mosques of Leicestershire

[edit]

Also propose renaming Category:Mosques of Lincolnshire to Category:Mosques in Lincolnshire
Nominator's rationale: Compatibility with Category:Mosques in England and Category:Churches in Leicestershire, etc. PamD 10:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Streets in Crawley and Nedlands

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category arbitrarily combining two suburbs of Perth, unclear. Contains one street and a list of streets. Appears to be WP:NONDEF. Propose a merge to parent category. AusLondonder (talk) 10:33, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - at the time it was not arbitrarily, and for the record there were real life attempts in collaboration to work on the process of expanding material about streets in Perth. Seems to have died a death, some time ago. JarrahTree 10:42, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Oronzio De Nora

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category that does not appear warranted as it contains only the company founded by the subject and his nephew who is notable for other reasons. AusLondonder (talk) 10:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the three articles currently in this category, a fourth article which I plan to work on about Amuchina which Oronzio De Nora invented would also be in this category. Is there a minimum number of articles needed to warrant a category? I have seen many categories with less than 4 articles. Possummayhem (talk) 15:50, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Labor disputes in Mali

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only article in this category is 2020 Malian protests not a specific industrial dispute. Unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 08:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:2020s debut plays

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I would like to propose Category:2020s debut plays for deletion; the scope of the category is near-identical to Category:2020s plays (recording the year/decade that a play is first performed) but also as the category, two-and-a-half years after creation, has only had two articles added to it. It is, in my opinion, redundant and requires deletion.--OGBC1992 (talk) 06:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This nomination was malformed and has been fixed. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Statues of Simón Bolívar

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to parent cat. Unnecessary intersection between person and location. Omnis Scientia (talk) 04:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Film and television memes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category currently looks like a trivial and non-defining mess. It is filled with all of these different things known for their status as a meme. However not every single article in this category mentions the existence of a meme, and the redirects aren't helpful either because no sources can be applied to them. Furthermore, only very few out of the 329 pages in this category are for the individual memes themselves such as Truck-kun. Should we only include the individual memes, we would be left with less than 20 articles (no redirects included). If you are willing to oppose this request, please think for a minute and read this previous discussion that lead to the deletion of Category:Music memes [3]

QuantumFoam66 (talk) 04:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Purge. However, if a purge cannot be done or this category is again filled with this many unrelated entries, then it's better to just delete then have this cruft. For a page to fit this category it has to be about the meme, not something that mentions the meme, not a character that appears in the meme. Gonnym (talk) 10:34, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Malaysian hoteliers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only has 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 03:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge – I tried populating it with PetScan, but all I could find was Gaston Dutronquoy (who might barely count as a Malaysian hotelier, by a technicality). jlwoodwa (talk) 04:03, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to North Macedonia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation as only contains a list article, List of ambassadors of the United Kingdom to North Macedonia, which is already appropriately categorised. AusLondonder (talk) 03:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge for now – the list only has redlinks. I don't think the list article is already appropriately categorised – what about Category:North Macedonia–United Kingdom relations? Also, for future reference, this could have been speedied under WP:C2F. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, you are right I will add that category. AusLondonder (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to Guinea-Bissau

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article for someone who served as a non-resident ambassador. Pointless and unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 03:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Years in Shigatse

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, this tree exclusively contains buildings and structures which we never put directly in a year category. For countries we have "establishments by year" categories but I have never seen that for cities. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Has not been tagged for a full week. If there are no further comments in a week, we are all set for deletion :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 9

[edit]

Category:Sexual assaults in the United Kingdom

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category about "sexual assaults" which contains only a redirect to a sexual assault referral centre. Serves no purpose. AusLondonder (talk) 23:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:121st United States Congress

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation as only contains a redirect and a subcat full of redirects. Serves no purpose. AusLondonder (talk) 22:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Defunct airlines of Réunion

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category contains a single page, unhelpful for navigation. Propose merge to Category:Defunct airlines of France. AusLondonder (talk) 20:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Defunct airlines of Mauritius (1P) and other underpopulated child cats of Category:Defunct airlines of Africa like Eritrea, South Sudan and Somalia.
Category:Defunct airlines of Europe: Faroe Islands‎ (1 P); Guernsey‎ (1 P); Belarus‎ (2 P); Montenegro‎ (1 P)
Category:Defunct airlines of Asia by country: East Timor‎ (2 P); Kuwait‎ (2 P); Mongolia‎ (2 P); Oman‎ (1 P); Syria‎ (1 P)

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

Category:Defunct airlines of Guadeloupe

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category contains a single page, unhelpful for navigation. Propose merge to Category:Defunct airlines of France and Category:Defunct airlines of the Caribbean. AusLondonder (talk) 20:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Single-member category for an unused userspace template. Merge it to Category:User custom license tags. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Herbert Sutcliffe

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary eponymous parent category for a single related article. WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Maki (singer)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The main article, a template (that shouldn't even be categorized in a mainspace category) and two song articles are simply not enough to currently warrant an eponymous category. Pichpich (talk) 18:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Maki (singer) songs to fit under the Songs by artist category scheme and remove the main article and template. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm ok with that. Pichpich (talk) 21:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Airliner bombings in the United States

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Violates WP:OCLOCATION and WP:NARROWCAT; the absolute number of airliner bombings is too small to warrant subdividing, it's unlikely to grow substantially in the future, and the country where a bombing took place is not a central defining characteristic. OCLOCATION dictates that countries of occurrence may be useful for dividing up huge and unwieldy categories, but this isn't one of them, and is unlikely to ever be. Carguychris (talk) 19:00, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep Nomination does not consider the effect of this deletion on Category:Improvised explosive device bombings in the United States where this will result in declining navigation abilities to get to quickly see those articles about IEDs involving aircraft in the United States. Hmains (talk) 19:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I considered that. There are only about twenty listings in that category. Adding nine more should not make the category unwieldy, and since the articles are all named "<airline name> <flight number>", it's obvious which ones are airliner bombings. Carguychris (talk) 19:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by missile shootdowns

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category name seems self-contradictory or even oxymoronic, and inherently implies a cause. Shootdowns are typically intentional acts and not accidents; in the rare occurrences in which aircraft have been shot down under circumstances that may be truly accidental, considerable controversy typically exists, and blanket categorization implying a cause could be a violation of WP:NPOV. Carguychris (talk) 16:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. "accidents and incidents " includes non-accidents. Please suggest an alternative name if you dislike it. Mason (talk) 21:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Aircraft shootdown incidents already exists, so this branch of Category:Aviation accidents and incidents seems redundant. Suggest Category:Aircraft shootdown incidents involving surface-to-air missiles. (It is unclear whether the creator of this subcategory intended to restrict it to SAM shootdowns, but the only article currently in the category is a SAM shootdown, and I would argue that in air-to-air or fighter shootdowns, the weapon used is non-defining.) Carguychris (talk) 21:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by fighter aircraft shootdowns

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category name seems self-contradictory or even oxymoronic, and inherently implies a cause. Shootdowns are typically intentional acts and not accidents; in the rare occurrences in which aircraft have been shot down under circumstances that may be truly accidental, considerable controversy typically exists, and blanket categorization implying a cause could be a violation of WP:NPOV. Proposed category name is less subjective. Carguychris (talk) 16:53, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose rename. This is inconsistent with the rest of the category tree. Mason (talk) 21:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This CFD and the aforementioned "missile shootdown" category effectively created a branch of Category:Aviation accidents and incidents that duplicates Category:Aircraft shootdown incidents. These incidents only need to be listed in one category tree, and the "shootdown incidents" tree existed first; these new "shootdowns" branches of the "accidents and incidents" tree are redundant and should be deleted. Pardon my failure to mention that in the initial proposal. Carguychris (talk) 23:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Constituencies of the National Assembly of Botswana (historic)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with parent Category:Former constituencies. The "defunct" category duplicates the content. – Fayenatic London 13:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aficionado538 (talk) 14:26, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will add the subcategories to this nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:51, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no opinion on whether this is a good idea or not. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Recipients of KLF Award

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Single entry, limited scope. Veldsenk (talk) 13:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The current title may be misleading implying that all those people died due to LGBTQ issues. Some of them, however, committed suicide for other reasons, such as Alexander McQueen. Proposed title would also be consistent with the Foo who died by suicide scheme: Category:College students who died by suicide‎, Category:People who died by suicide in prison custody‎, etc. Brandmeistertalk 08:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People of Mexican side in the Texas Revolution

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The current name sounds awkward and is confusing/inconsistent Mason (talk) 01:53, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:36, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I don't love the suggestion, but it is an improvement. Mason (talk) 11:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

  1. If we want to include only regular military personnel of Mexico, then the name should be Mexican military personnel of the Texas Revolution (somewhat equivalent to sibling Category:Army of the Republic of Texas personnel killed in the Texas Revolution, except that not all of them were killed).
  2. If we want to include regular military personnel AND irregular combatants, but exclude civilians, then Mexican Republic combatants of the Texas Revolution is the best option per Carguychris (& Mason).
  3. If we want to include all civilian, regular and irregular participants, then Pro-Mexican people of the Texas Revolution is the best option per Category:Pro-Russian people of the Russo-Ukrainian War and Category:Pro-Ukrainian people of the Russo-Ukrainian War. NLeeuw (talk) 06:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Southend-on-Sea (district)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: As per discussion at AFD for County Borough of Southend-on-Sea, the boundaries for the city and district are the same. Eastbourne is good example of this which has one category for the whole town and district.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 06:15, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eastbourne is not the same as it is completely unparished unlike Southend (and as noted below the district article was kept). Southend actually has 3 potential definitions that we could use namely the smallest being the part of the district which has "Southend-on-Sea" as the post town, the next smallest being the unparished area which roughly covers both Southend and Westcliff-on-Sea post towns namely excluding Leigh-on-Sea parish and the largest being the whole district. There is also Southend Urban Area but in 2021 the was urban areas/BUAs seems to have changed so it may not still exist. That said I'm not sure maintaining separate categories for the settlement/unparished area and district is helpful as categories are generally less granular than articles so it may well be better to just merge all into 1 category covering all definitions. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But the parished area (leigh) falls within the wider Southend UA border. If anything Leigh should have its own category? Davidstewartharvey (talk) 10:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes Leigh probably should have its own category namely for the area covered by the parish. We have other parishes with categories, see Category:Civil parishes in Essex. All the other articles that are in the unparished area could go in the categories for the settlement. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The latter category is for the traditional town of Southend-on-Sea, not the wider district. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In the case of somewhere like Colchester, where the boundaries of the district are outside the city boundaries I can understand having separate categories (Colchester (town) and Boroughof Colchester), but Southend District and city boundaries are the same. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 10:57, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:48, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:People from Southend-on-Sea (district)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: As per AFD at County Borough of Southend-on-Sea, the boundaries between City and district are the same. Also there are individual category pages for suburbs of Southend.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 06:24, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The latter category is for people from the traditional town of Southend-on-Sea, not the wider district, hence the subcats of the district category. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • So what is the traditional town of Southend? Read any history book and the town is seen as the whole not its parts after they were absorbed into the district. Also Colchester only has one category, People from Colchester, and then separate categories for the other localities in the district, which Southend does with People from Westcliff-on-Sea and People from Leigh on Sea already existing. Therefore a district category is not required.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 11:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • We could use Category:People Southend-on-Sea (district) as a Container category with People from Westcliff-on-Sea etc linked to that? And have a separate People from Southend-on-Sea- much like London has?

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:09, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Department stores in Southend-On-Sea (town)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Southend is now a city. As per afd on County Borough of Southend-on-Sea, there is no differentation between the city and district boundaries.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 06:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Professorships in theology

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overlaping underpopulated category Mason (talk) 03:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by auxiliary equipment failure

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category name is excessively vague and therefore violates WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. There is little agreement in the aviation community as to what constitutes "auxiliary equipment". Carguychris (talk) 17:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please suggest a merge target. Mason (talk) 21:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is difficult given the ambiguity of the current name. The sole current article in the category, TWA Flight 529, crashed due to an elevator failure. Perhaps Category:Aviation accidents and incidents involving flight control failure? The underlying issue is the lack of a consistent, unambiguous definition for "auxiliary equipment". "Flight control" is considerably easier to define, but is also ambiguous to some degree. All that being said, I'm also concerned that creating myriad aircraft accident categories by cause may lead to WP:ARBITRARYCAT and WP:NARROWCAT concerns. Carguychris (talk) 21:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's merge target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge per Marco. Mason (talk) 22:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Religion in the Middle East

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: West Asia and the Middle East largely overlap, so we do not need both category trees. It is better to keep West Asia because it is consistent with other subcategories in Category:Religion in Asia by region. Sakakami (talk) 18:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge or reverse merge per nom and rename dependent on the merge direction. There is also this discussion which is still open. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly oppose - The reason these categories "largely overlap" is entirely because the regions themselves "largely overlap". An incovenient fact, perhaps, but a reality that Wikipedia is bound to respect - and that our categories must reflect. (There are many other overlapping category trees that we maintain simply because they reflect aspects of the real world.) Furthermore, the term "Middle East" is well-known to the great majority of readers, who are unlikely to be familiar with the term "West Asia". Anomalous+0 (talk) 07:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Anomalous+0's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's response to the objection?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag the West Asian categories to allow for a reverse merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Church of Sweden clergymen in Colonial North America

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category is extremely narrow. I think it should either be merged to 17th/18th century American Lutheran clergy or renamed to Church of Sweden clergy from the Thirteen Colonies Mason (talk) 03:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:13, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Prohibition-era gangsters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These are really overlapping categories. Does anyone have ideas for how to make these two categories more distinct, or perhaps combine them? For the record. Prohibition in the united states was from Jan 17, 1920 – Dec 5, 1933, whereas the great depression was from 1929 to 1939ish. Mason (talk) 02:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
comment Merging in this way does not seem to be the answer, as it is not true that all Category:Depression-era gangsters also were active in the Depression era. Perhaps, someone can make a count of the actual overlap of articles, not just the time period overlaps. thanks Hmains (talk) 02:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Urdu-language women writers

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

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

Yes, but that's the not question. The intersection is gender with language and occupation. I don't think this meets the criteria for EGRS, and there are no other categories at this intersection. @Nederlandse Leeuw do you have evidence to the contrary that Urdu-language women writers meet the criteria at the intersection? Aka is the "combination [] itself recognized as a defining topic that has already been established (in reliable sources showing substantial existing research specific to the topic), as academically or culturally significant in its own right"? Mason (talk) 02:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
About 49.300 results for "women urdu writers" in Google Scholar. Just to highlight a few:
  • The Role of Female Writers in the Promotion of Popular Literature in Urdu.
  • Women Reading/Women Writing: Anxiety and Āzādī in Twentieth Century Urdu Pulp Fiction
  • Female Voices: Women Writers in Hyderabad at the Beginning of the Twentieth Century: there has been a whole movement of female writers in Urdu, both of poetry and of prose
  • Images of Women in Urdu Novels Written by Muslim Women: An Analysis from A Feminist Perspective
  • Articulation, agency and embodiment in contemporary Pakistani Urdu poetry by women
  • Urdu women's magazines in the early twentieth century
  • Urban Women Rebels: Voices of Dissent in Urdu Popular Fiction
  • Feminine or Patriarchal: Story of Adam and Eve in Urdu Novels by Women Writers
Etc.
Also plenty of Google Books, e.g.
  • The Language They Chose: Women's Writing in Urdu Vol I: Fiction
  • The Language They Chose: Women's Writing in Urdu Vol II: Non-Fiction
  • Women's Writings from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh: The Worlds of Bangla and Urdu
  • Parwaaz: A Selection of Urdu Short Stories by Women
  • Portrayals of Women in Pakistan: An Analysis of Fahmīdah Riyāẓ’s Urdu Poetry
Etc.
So yes @Smasongarrison, I think I might have some evidence. Arguably, it's high time that this topic received its own stand-alone article. NLeeuw (talk) 05:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indian women translators

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between nationality, gender, and genre of writing, per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 13:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

I was basing the target on the fact that it's typically a parent category, but I haven't thought deeply about whether translators are also defined as being linguists. Mason (talk) 02:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Louisville Black Caps

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

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


October 8

[edit]

Category:Society of Ukrainian Progressors members

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Emptied: no refs. No such society. Mistranslation? --Altenmann >talk 21:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:16 Smasongarrison talk contribs (Dmytro Doroshenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist 

      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Mykhailo Hrushevsky added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Mykola Vasylenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Symon Petliura added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Serhiy Yefremov added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist
      		13:16  Smasongarrison talk contribs (Volodymyr Vynnychenko added to category, this page is included within other pages) diffhist

Category:Subatomic particle symbol templates

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Bot-created single-page cat. Looks like it just contains a helper for Template:Subatomic particle? Dunno if should merge into that cat, no opinion whatsoever, just listing bit of botcruft for cleanup. Slowking Man (talk) 20:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Early abbots by century

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: the earliest non-Christian (Buddhist) abbot that we have an article about is Yishan Yining who lived in the 13th century. These categories don't contribute to navigation until we have articles about earlier Buddhist abbots. All Irish abbots of this period were Christian abbots and can be added as subcategories thereof. It would be naieve to state that these Irish abbots do not belong in Christian abbots just because the Irish category name does not specify "Christian". Wikipedia should reflect the real world and not get stuck too much in its internal organization. The real world is that there weren't Buddhist abbots in medieval Ireland, they were all Christian. This nomination is of course without objection to recreation once we have articles about earlier Buddhist abbots. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:07, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. > It would be naieve to state that these Irish abbots do not belong in Christian abbots just because the Irish category name does not specify "Christian".
I never said that the individuals in the page don't belong in the Christian abbots category. I said that you shouldn't be conflating nationality and religion at the category level. Three things: I don't see why you're suggesting deletion, instead of merging. This deletion is going to break the abbot by nationality template. This seems premature, given that I asked you about this on your talk page. Mason (talk) 21:47, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jainism in India by city

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge for now, surprisingly few articles in this categories. By all means recreate when more articles are available. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

North American Indigenous categories

[edit]
Rename Category:Anti-indigenous racism in North America to Category:Anti-Indigenous racism in North America
Rename Category:Genocide of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Genocide of Indigenous peoples of North America
Rename Category:Anti-indigenous racism in the United States to Category:Anti-Indigenous racism in the United States
Rename Category:Assimilation of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Assimilation of Indigenous peoples of North America
Rename Category:People of indigenous North American descent to Category:People of Indigenous North American descent
Rename Category:History of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:History of Indigenous peoples of North America
Rename Category:History of indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest to Category:History of Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest
Rename Category:Treaties of indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Treaties of Indigenous peoples of North America
Rename Category:Wars involving the indigenous peoples of North America to Category:Wars involving the Indigenous peoples of North America
Rename Category:American people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:American people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Puerto Rican people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Puerto Rican people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Belizean people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Belizean people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Cuban people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Cuban people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Dominica people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Dominica people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Dominican Republic people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Dominican Republic people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Guatemalan people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Guatemalan people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Haitian people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Haitian people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Honduran people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Honduran people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Mexican people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Mexican people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Panamanian people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Panamanian people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Salvadoran people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Salvadoran people of Indigenous peoples descent
Rename Category:Trinidad and Tobago people of indigenous peoples descent to Category:Trinidad and Tobago people of Indigenous peoples descent
Nominator's rationale: Capitalize the word "Indigenous", as capitalization is the common practice in North America and on Wikipedia when referring to the Indigenous peoples of North America. This capitalization would be in line with the recommendations of the Associated Press, APA Style, the Chicago Manual of Style, the United Nations, and the Native American Journalists Association. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 16:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Museums with wikis

[edit]
Convert Category:Museums with wikis to article List of museum wikis
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining feature of a museum. It's probably interesting enough to be made into a list. Mason (talk) 12:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Addis Standard people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is the only subcategory in Category:Journalists by publication that has but a single article. Most of them have a fairly substantial number, though I did spot a couple with only 4 articles. 76.9.91.187 (talk) 09:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Majority-minority cities and towns in in McHenry County, Illinois

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is an empty category with a repeated "in" in the title, which is pretty much useless because its parent category contains two such entities and it's only gotten 16 views in its lifetime (equating to only slightly more than two every 115 days, which is really small). I'm not sure we really need it for those reasons. Regards, SONIC678 05:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pointers to WMF tools

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: None of these tools are maintained by the WMF. I suspect the creator meant "WMF Labs", but that name has been replaced by Toolforge now. Legoktm (talk) 04:23, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The category currently has four members, three of which are indeed Toolforge tools (Wikipedia:AfD stats, Wikipedia:Editor Interaction Analyzer, Wikipedia:XfD stats). Wikipedia:Quick intersection is not, but it's historical and it could probably just be upmerged to the parent (Category:Wikimedia Cloud Services) instead. I agree that this category should be called Toolforge rather than WMF.
However, Category:Toolforge tools already exists, with three members: User:Guy Keogh/verify is a soft redirect, Wikipedia:Tools/RAMP editor is historical, and Wikipedia:NPP Browser is a normal page. I don't think there's a significant difference between these two categories, or enough members that we need to subcategorize the "pointers". Therefore, instead of renaming, I propose to merge Category:Pointers to WMF tools into Category:Toolforge tools. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds good to me, thanks. Legoktm (talk) 15:24, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Government organizations of Indonesia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layer. This category doesn't help navigation Mason (talk) 03:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Second ladies and gentlemen of the Philippines

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NEOLOGISM, Second Ladies are not a thing in Philippine politics. We are not like the United States which uses such term. Second Ladies/Gentlemen at best are just a synonym for the Vice President's spouse, unlike the First Lady/Gentlemen who actually serves a role for being the host at the Malacanang Palace and is distinct from the Spouse of the President of the Philippines Hariboneagle927 (talk) 02:24, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nuclear weapons and the Russian invasion of Ukraine

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories. Upmerge. Mason (talk) 02:13, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pro–nuclear weapons activists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category that's not helpful for navigation. There's only one page in here. Mason (talk) 02:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Blackpink members albums

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There is no scheme for categorizing individual members solo albums by albums by members of groups, and each is already linked from the group's albums category Category:Blackpink albums (which appears to be the standard). For precedent, I found Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 February 19#Category:The Cars' solo albums. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 7

[edit]

Category:Sega Games franchises

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: "Sega Games" is not even its own thing, it literally just refers to Sega. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Reports on FOO

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Siblings are Category:Reports on finance and business. The rename makes it clearer that the subject matter of the report is education, rather than a report that educates or is a school assignment. For Health, the rename broadens the category to be more usable Mason (talk) 22:31, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Digital currency exchanges

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Cryptocurrency exchanges is the common term and matches with our Wikipedia article. Gheus (talk) 22:14, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Loss of Canadian citizenship by prior Nazi affiliation

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category is extremely awkwardly named. I've made a tentative attempt, but I'd be really open to alternatives. Mason (talk) 22:22, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge is fine with me. Mason (talk) 21:17, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's the difference between Category:Loss of Canadian citizenship by prior Nazi affiliation and Category:Nazis deported from Canada? Looking at their members, they mostly overlap but not entirely. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Figured it out – you can be deported without having been a citizen (Konrāds Kalējs), and you can lose your citizenship without being deported (Helmut Oberlander and Walter Obodzinsky). It's a pretty subtle difference, and I'm not sure it needs to be represented in the categories. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:41, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:European theatre of World War II people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The vast majority of these categories are not defined by the European theater of ww2 or Pacific theater. These are primarily people who are European or Asian nationals, but not associated with the specific military campaign. If not merged, it should be purged of nationals. Mason (talk) 21:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So do you mean that it's acceptable to associate people with a war but not with a military campaign? The problem is the original categorization of World War II people was too confusing and full of redundancy. In my opinion, the 'theater' categorization is merely a categorization by region to clarify the category and make it show what are the most important and relevant under the subject. Aronlee90 (talk) 02:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • They're not associated with a campaign. Jews of World War II‎ are not defined by the European military campaign. You're conflating region with military campaign. Not everyone in a region is associated with the war. If you wanted to break it down by region. What about Europeans who fought in the pacific? Would they go in both campaigns? This just doesn't seem helpful for navigation as it conflates several category trees.Mason (talk) 03:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Populated places in the Middle East

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: the Middle East and West Asia are very overlapping. All subcategories are already in Category:Populated places in West Asia. Sakakami (talk) 18:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Anomalous+0's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:59, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to tag Category:Populated places in West Asia.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Centuries in the Southern Nigeria Protectorate

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, the Southern Nigeria Protectorate mainly existed within one century, all content is already in the two decade categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of statutory instruments of the Welsh Assembly

[edit]

Category:Fictional populated places in Mexico

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The only article in this category is not about a fictional location, but a short story. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional jackals

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains two articles that are about fictional jackals, the rest are either works that should not belong in a fictional character category, or are redirects. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Events at Yankee Stadium

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE, we do not categorize events by the venues they were held at. Bearcat (talk) 14:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Morley–Ellenbrook line

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The main page has been moved due to a name change, so the category should be too. Steelkamp (talk) 10:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the operator of the line https://www.metronet.wa.gov.au/news/latest-news/hello-ellenbrook-line agrees with that JarrahTree 10:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per the spirit of WP:CONSUB. (For future reference, this could have been speedily renamed under C2D.) jlwoodwa (talk) 16:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This trust has now been merged and renamed, see the article at Hampshire and Isle of Wight Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust Elshad (talk) 10:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Diseases and disorders

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This was moved to the current name via a 2008 decision with very little discussion. However, the main article is disease, not diseases and disorders. This makes the category not match the article. I believe it should be moved back to the broader "Disease" to match the main article, which does not only include individual diseases but also the entire topic of disease. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This category tree is suppose to include chronic disorders, not just diseases. Mason (talk) 14:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mason: The article disease states that a disorder is a form of disease. Disorder (medicine) is not an article. That means the current title is redundant. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. This rename makes it seem like you're removing disability and related concepts from the tree. Even if that isn't your intent, I see no advantage to this rename beyond brevity. I actipate numerous removals of people with disabilities from the child categories, as well as the removal of chronic disabilities. Moreover, I do not want to have to argue that Autism is a disease rather than a neurological difference. Mason (talk) 22:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Brevity is established Wikipedia policy, see WP:CONCISE. On the other hand, having something not cause offense to people is not. In fact the opposite is true, see WP:NOTCENSORED. So if the argument is that classifying many things under a disease banner will cause offense, it isn't really a policy-based reason. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have missing my point. @Zxcvbnm I am trying to avoid have people misunderstand the category. "I actipate numerous removals of people with disabilities from the child categories, as well as the removal of chronic disabilities." This means that I expect many people to misunderstand that disease includes disorders. And I do not want to have to explain to people that over and over again that this definition is broad. WP:CONCISE says that the goal is to "balance brevity with sufficient information to identify the topic to a person familiar with the general subject area." What I am saying is that the new name does not provide sufficient information, and that for example, Autism is not some term people intuitive consider a disease. Mason (talk) 21:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like this is a thing that can be explained in the category's description. For example, "This category also contains things typically referred to as disorders in common parlance. Do not remove X and Y". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:AAGPBL teams

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

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

@Namiba, in that sense you can make one for every team, plus a category for managers, but I don't think that will be good for navigation at all since only one team - the Rockford Peaches - was around long enough to have at least five managers. As I noted, these are all well covered with other categories in Category:All-American Girls Professional Baseball League so why keep?
@Marcocapelle, what do you think? I know you changed your vote but still. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should make one for every team. I'm personally trying to expand the categorization scheme for women's sports (see Category:Women's sports by populated place.)--User:Namiba 14:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Collaborators during World War II occupations

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This name is *really* confusing. I suggest changing it from occupation to (people) to make it clearer that this is about individuals. I'm very open to alternatives. Mason (talk) 13:58, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Rename to Category:Collaborators during World War II as a more concise and less confusing title. Technically this might slightly expand the category's scope, but I don't think that's a problem; for one, its subcategories don't specify "during occupations". jlwoodwa (talk) 16:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:British Asian actors

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

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

Category:Labor disputes in Ghana

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now: Only one page in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 23:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Updated the target after the speedy move).--Ymblanter (talk) 07:31, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Ghana is a distinct country and has a specific strike within the category. I think it would be damaging to remove this category and to try to homogeneous it with the broader continent of africa. The lack of more then one strike is more reflective of a systematic bias towards focusing on north america and europe rather than a lack of historical strikes. Thanks, User:LoomCreek (talk)
  • That bias will probably exist, but the only remedy is having more articles about the topic. As long as that is not the case the category is just a hindrance in finding related articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:15, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are now two articles in the category, the Positive Action campaign which involved a nationwide general strike in 1950 and a played a critical role in Ghana's independence years later. I plan to expand the article to cover all the specifics around it. So I think at this point removing the category would most definitely be detrimental.- LoomCreek (talk) 14:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are too many tiny categories in this tree. Nothing is findable right now. You're welcome to make continental categories if you think that would help. But I think your time is better spent crafting articles. Mason (talk) 21:13, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 06:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Southern United States independence activists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These seem to be highly overlapping Mason (talk) 04:05, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Transgender by country

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Following Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 13#Category:Transgender in Russia, it seems the problem is Transgender being an adjective, rather than a noun word or noun phrase. Then I think transness is a good alternative solution, as that's the most accepted noun for transgenderness in English, similar to the Francophone equivalents transidentity (transidentité) or transitude, which are less common in English. Another option would be "Transgender topics", which would be more recognizable. --MikutoH talk! 01:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alternative - either Transgender topics or Transgender people. I definitely don’t like transness - as the dictionary entry says, it’s about a condition and that just sounds worse, being transgender isn’t a condition defined by one’s transness, which is why it’s also listed as synonymous with other such terms that are similarly considered to be pejorative nowadays. Raladic (talk) 05:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support transness I don't see a good alternative to that that makes sense.★Trekker (talk) 10:00, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, but oppose the name "Transness". It's unclear to people who are not familiar with the topic. Either of the alternatives are fine with me, such as Transgender topics in FOO, Transgender rights in FOO, etc. I'd need convincing for Transgender people in FOO because it will get mixed up with FOOian transgender people (a.k.a. nationals of a country who are trans. Mason (talk) 20:09, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    it may suggest but so would these. --MikutoH talk! 21:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Would you want to change those categories to Womenness? I think that Transgender topics is a better solution than Tranness. Mason (talk) 21:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think MikutoH's point is that, e.g., Category:Women in Canada could be mistaken for its biography-holding subcategory Category:Canadian women. Despite that potential ambiguity, that naming structure is, to my ears, miles better than changing the parent to Women's topics in Canada. I think the same applies here.--Trystan (talk) 12:47, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, prefer transgender topics for now. The adjective has bugged me for some time, but I haven't been able to come up with a better term myself. Transness is too specific and rather obscure. I thought of Transgender issues in Foo, but that conveys a non-neutral tone. Topics sounds a bit meta/redundant (every Wikipedia category covers a topic), but is probably the best option, unless someone can come up with something else. --Paul_012 (talk) 02:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for transgender topics in lieu of a better suggestion. Both the current titles and transness are confusing titles, with the latter being just an obscure neologism.
  • Support Transgender people in Foo. It would be consistent with Category:Women by country, which uses Women in Foo and not Women's topics in Foo. 1857a (talk) 23:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Transgender people in Foo per 1857a. That is in inescapably the best and clearest description of the unifying topic of the subcategories and articles these categories contain. Transgender history is the history of transgender people, transgender rights are the rights of transgender people, etc. The category description can specify to use the Fooian transgender people subcategory for individual biographies.--Trystan (talk) 12:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Transgender topics for now. Language is evolving quickly here so we may have to revisit this, but this seems like the clearest and neutralist terminology for now. (Open to altnernatives except for "transness" which seems unclear to me.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Transgender topics per RevelationDirect. Transness is a very uncommon word for this topic area. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:46, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Local politicians by nationality

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Consistensy with (grand)parents, some cousins/siblings, and some children. --MikutoH talk! 01:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that I've made a couple of minor modifications to fix obvious spelling errors ("Keynian" instead of "Kenyan", "New Zealan" instead of "New Zealand", "Belguian" instead of "Belgian"). Bearcat (talk) 01:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I apologize for the mistakes. However, New Zealand is the adjective for NZ people: Category:New_Zealand_politicians. We need to rename the entire category tree if that's right. --MikutoH talk! 01:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say it wasn't. But you typed "Zealan", as in without the d on the end of it. Bearcat (talk) 02:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OOps sorry I confused it. Yeah it was a typo, my keyboard may have eaten it. --MikutoH talk! 02:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This nomination appear to be based on the expectation that, for example, Category:Local politicians in Ireland is intended as a set of local politicians from Ireland. When, as far as I can tell, it is a set of local politicians in Ireland. (Citizenship and nationality are not, presumably, the same thing as representation or location. In Ireland, for example, while local representatives must be "ordinarily resident in Ireland" (..) "You do not have to be an Irish citizen".) Are we happy that all of the members of all of these categories are grouped by nationality (as implied by the nom). And not by location/representation (as implied by the category names)? In short, are "local politicians by nationality" the same as "local politicians by nation"? (I'm not personally sure they are...) Guliolopez (talk) 10:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose
    1. Country is not the same as nation.
    2. as noted above, the current categories are about politicians in a country, not from a country (or nation)
    3. Specific to Australia, Local government in Australia is a thing. I'd read "local politicians" as being the ones who live near me (or the people they represent) rather than living near where parliament sits or being "parachuted in" to a safe seat. That is particularly about state and federal politicians, local government is much more local in Australia, particularly in some states.
--Scott Davis Talk 11:57, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For previous similar discussions, see:
Mitch Ames (talk) 12:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. Not all politicians in Foo have Fooinan nationality. Sakakami (talk) 14:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Based on WP:CATNAME it looks like the current format of <political office> in country is correct but I have no objection to the proposal as it brings these categories into line with parent/grandparent categories, particularly Fooinan politicians. Those opposing the nomination maybe confusing citizenship/nationality with adjectival/demonymic forms for countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Obi2canibe (talk • contribs)
  • Oppose per above commenters. The issue here is that nationality and residency are overlapping but not completely identical conditions — because most countries do permit immigrants (usually, but not necessarily always, immigrants who have naturalized as citizens) to hold political office, there can be a difference between where the person is "from" and where the person did the politics. The intention of Category:Local politicians in Canada, for example, is that the person did the politics in Canada — whereas Category:Canadian local politicians could potentially have to include a Canadian-born-and-raised person who moved to Brazil and did local politics in Brazil, and thus was a "Canadian who did local politics" but not a "person who did local politics in Canada". But the latter is what we're after here, not the former. Bearcat (talk) 21:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per explanations by Scott Davis, Mitch Ames and Bearcat - the notion that local government politicians can be subsumed into local politicians simply does not fit in the local language context in Australia (and probably a lot of the other countries as well), despite Obi2canibes' useful explanation about foo and fitting with category trees. JarrahTree 01:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose re Australia. As others have said, it proposes replacing a category name which is crystal clear in its meaning with one that is confusing and ambiguous. Kerry (talk) 04:38, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Executed Italian fascists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: 2x upmerge. Non-defining 3x intersection between cause of death, nationality, and political orientation. Notably, there's no Category:Executed fascists category tree. Mason (talk) 00:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Some of these people were executed not for ideology alone. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --MikutoH talk! 02:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Older discussions

[edit]

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

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/All_current_discussions&oldid=1202523150"