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 08:43, 16 May 2025 (UTC). Currently, there are 49 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]
This may be eligible for speedy per C2C, but since there is a current RM for the article, there's a good chance this should end up being Category:KAJ (group) songs. So I oppose per C2D as there is "ongoing discussion about the name of the page". Best to wait out the discussion. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 21:48, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to full discussion

[edit]

Current discussions

[edit]
Shortcut

May 18

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

City to populated places for association football categories

[edit]

Category:Miyagi Prefecture railway station stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Has served it's purpose, but now it's time for it to go along with Template:Miyagi-railstation-stub because there are only the template remaining inside. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 06:42, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization fix for "Arrondissement" geography stub categories

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: It was brought to my attention that the word "arrondissement" is not a proper noun, nor is it part of the official name of any arrondissement of France. I also noticed this through some categories that weren't recently made, such as Arras arrondissement geography stubs. Anyway, there are a lot of categories that need the word "arrondissement" lowercase. Should the templates with "Arrondissement" in them get recapitalized, too? - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 02:33, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Slaves "from"

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, while "from" is generally the norm when a denonym cannot be used, it is too ambiguous in this particular case. "From" could (hypothetically) refer to the home country where the slave grew up before being enslaved, but here it refers to the (new) country where the person is being enslaved. In this case "in" is a lot clearer than "from". Marcocapelle (talk) 02:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of places in the United Kingdom

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, unclear distinction between the two levels of categories. Note that places is not populated places, which is a clearly separate topic. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:17, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Montpellier stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This stub category has less than 60 transclusions - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 02:06, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dieppe geography stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I found this French arrondissement geography stub category that don't have the word "arrondissement" in there. - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 02:02, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Le Havre geography stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I found this French arrondissement geography stub category that don't have the word "arrondissement" in there. - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 02:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rouen geography stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I found this French arrondissement geography stub category that don't have the word "arrondissement" in there. - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 02:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:California ghost town stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This stub category has less than 60 items in it, so it should be upmerged - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 01:15, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]



May 17

[edit]

Category:Railway stations in Gävleborg County

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: One article in each; does not help navigation. All are already categorised in the Railway stations in Sweden-tree and the single-merge target is already in the Buildings and structures in Västmanland County-tree. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 16:53, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Railway stations located underground in Malmö

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overly specific; 1–3 entries in each. The single-entry target is already in the Skåne County tree. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 16:53, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Women's Championship (England)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The parent article of the category, Women's Super League 2, was recently renamed after the league was rebranded from the Women's Championship to the Women's Super League 2. — AFC Vixen 🦊 16:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Guelph Union players

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: team renamed to match men's team name RedPatch (talk) 13:56, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Governors of Kopparberg County

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The county only changed name; no specific article for Kopparberg County. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 10:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:County Councils of Sweden

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: What were the county councils of Sweden (Category:County Councils of Sweden) are now regioner (Regions of Sweden), making a potential mix-up with the category for non-administrative regions (Category:Regions of Sweden). Kaffet i halsen (talk) 16:41, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: What about Category:Regions of Sweden?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:38, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Restoration of the independence of the Baltic states

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization. We already have Category:Singing Revolution for the events leading to the independence of the Baltic States. Mellk (talk) 16:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on TamsaVakaras's latest comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:26, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The articles are not about the restoration of the independence as such, at best they are about a movement that aimed for restoration of the independence. Possibly rename the category if there is a main article about the movement. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:30, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Spiritism

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The word Spiritism is capitalised as a shorthand for a specific view formulated by Pierre Kardec; the main article is disambiguated in Wikipedia to Kardecist spiritism. IMHO the capitalised Spiritism is suitable for Wikipedia categories, but harmonising the inconsistent subcat was opposed at the Speedy page. – Fayenatic London 13:38, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of Speedy discussion
In conclusion, attempting precision in these categories looks viable, but I'm not convinced that it would he helpful. I'd still rather retain the looser category names to cover Kardecist and more syncretist ideas. – Fayenatic London 10:49, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The linked CFD was closed as merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:23, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American women civilians in World War II

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories and narrow intersection, we don't have an American civilians of WW2 category. SMasonGarrison 01:01, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, category distinguishes between those who served in the military and those who contributed as civilians. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 04:08, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:32, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@FieldMarine do you have suggestions on alternative renames? Because the challenge I have is that there's not a American civilians of WW2 parent category, so it doesn't make sense to me that we'd have an intersection just for women. SMasonGarrison 20:03, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, Category:American civilians in World War II. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 23:16, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With the continuous improvement of the project, I’m not surprised to see it added, especially considering the magnitude of World War II. One interesting point in my view is the number of women compared to men in the parent category, with women far exceeding men. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 13:04, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Battle of the Blades participants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These people are already notable celebrities or professionals, so clear violation of WP:PERFCAT for appearing on a TV series. --woodensuperman 07:47, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the base category, upmerge the season-specific subcategories back to it. Nearly all reality shows consist entirely of people who have other notability claims besides having been on a reality show — people don't get articles because they appeared on an Idol or Got Talent series, they get articles if and when they go on to parlay their time on a reality show into a stronger notability claim, like getting over WP:NMUSIC with their post-Idol recordings. So nobody is ever notable because they were on a reality show in and of itself — all "reality show participants" categories always consist of people who have other notability claims above and beyond the reality show, because the people wouldn't even have articles at all if appearing on a reality show was the sum total of their notability claim in and of itself.
    We have established a consensus against subcategorizing reality show categories by individual season, so I can't justify a keep argument on the season subcategories — but for the base category, the nominator hasn't demonstrated that this would be subject to different considerations than other reality show contestant categories like Category:Got Talent contestants, Category:Big Brother (franchise) contestants or Category:The Apprentice contestants, which all also consist entirely of people who have other notability claims besides competing on a reality show per se. Bearcat (talk) 17:05, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The difference with the examples you give like Big Brother is that these people came to prominence through their appearance on that show and we have tended to make an exception to WP:PERFCAT for them. However, participants in celebrity reality shows are not afforded that exception and are routinely deleted. This is more akin to Celebrity Big Brother, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 August 21#Category:Celebrity Big Brother (UK) contestants and many, many more examples. --woodensuperman 20:01, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus favors removal of the subcategories; should the parent category be deleted, too?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seasonal holidays

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant as we already have Category:January observances until Category:December observances. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:50, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Many holidays or festivals are tied to the time of the year, not a particular calendar month. Think of lunar holidays, they aren't tied to any specific month in a calendar year and that is only one example. Liz Read! Talk! 07:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:07, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:OrganicAcid-stub

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Capitalization edit, since templates like {{Alkanederivative-stub}} aren't capitalized like that... - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 02:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians with an account on Archive of Our Own

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Rename to match the more common naming convention in Category:Wikipedians by website. Alternately delete since it's not clear how this category aids collaboration. * Pppery * it has begun... 13:54, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (as creator) but Rename to Category:Wikipedians who use Archive of Our Own so that it is broader and more inclusive of editors who use the website to interact in ways that do not necessarily involve contributing stories or creating an account. I don't see any issues with the category existing, personally. Fan fiction and fandom are broad topics with much legitimate coverage on the encyclopedia, and given AO3's position of significance as a major platform for fandom communities of all stripes, I think it is fair to have a category available for users to indicate their interest in the website and topics related to it. silviaASH (inquire within) 14:11, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on silviaASH's suggested name?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:23, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:38, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Doctors of Divinity

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I don't think having a specific degree is defining by itself. I'd love some other opinions because I view it analogous to categorizing psychologists by whether they have a Ph.D., Psy.D, Ed.D., or ScD. (There are differences, but they aren't defining from a wikipedia standpoint) SMasonGarrison 01:32, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (for now) – if you want the category to be renamed, Smasongarrison, we do really need to see the new name. You are right that it should be a defining characteristic, and there was no consensus on that in the previous discussion. Regards, Moonraker (talk) 19:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know about the prevision CFD. I think even something like Doctors of Divinity (people) or People with Doctorates of Divinity. because for me, when I first found it, I thought they are all about doctorates of divitity rather than people who have degrees in it. SMasonGarrison 20:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A doctor is a person, a doctorate is a degree, please see Doctor of Divinity. Moonraker (talk) 13:16, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think a rename is necessary. If anything, just delete, these people aren't primarily known for an Anglophone title but rather for their theological writings and they should already be in an appropriate theologians category. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:17, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Antoinism

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains one article and an article that it links to. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:22, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:High Integrity Programming Language

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Frap (talk) 13:07, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's suggestion for further renaming?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:18, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Works set in cities

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename and re-parent to the Works tree. Normally "in fiction" categories contain "works set in", "fictional people" and "fictional locations". But in the above cases there are only works. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:33, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
One obvious problem with the proposed names: some of the items in these categories are not "set in" the places, but merely filmed there, with the locations standing in for somewhere else (real or fictional). Petra stands out as a perfect example of a place that is frequently used as a backdrop not as Petra, but as an imaginary location that may or may not be more clearly named or described. The problem, then, is what to name the category. "Depictions of" or "Portrayals of" might be problematic where a location isn't meant to represent itself; i.e. Toronto used to represent Metropolis, a London neighborhood used to depict nineteenth-century Dublin, etc. (although between the two, "depictions of" sounds less problematic because the actual place is "depicted" in a sense, even if it's standing in for somewhere else; I think that "portrayed" might also be capable of that meaning, but it seems less intuitive).
Perhaps "Fooburg in film and television" as a subcategory of "Fooburg in media" or "Fooburg in fiction"? But those categories wouldn't be limited to "fictional" appearances. Not sure that matters as a subcategory as long as some of the entries are fictional (whether or not they're intended to represent Fooburg—the defining criterion would be that it's in fiction). I note that written works shouldn't have this issue: they don't need to use one location to stand in for another; even in media such as graphic novels or comic books, the artist can draw the correct location or a completely original one (though photonovels of visual media using a stand-in location would be an exception). P Aculeius (talk) 14:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • This problem can be resolved easily by purging article Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen from Category:Petra in fiction. The article is in a ridiculous number of "shot in" categories anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:30, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That presumes that only one place is or is likely to be categorized based on its appearance as a different or generic location, and that it will only occur once... I'm reasonably certain that Petra has been used many times in various works of significance without any intention of it representing Petra. And so have many other places that might be identifiable to persons familiar with the backdrops, though not to general audiences.
    Purging a category of items in order to justify renaming it seems counterintuitive; it's not renaming, but changing the scope of the category. In this case categories intended to include depictions of places in fictional works would be expanded to include non-fiction, but at the same time restricted to exclude works that depict the place as a stand-in for somewhere else. So a painting of Tangier would be included, but a movie shot in Tangier but set in Baghdad or Marrakesh would not.
    The proposal seems to proceed from the fact that "Fooburg in fiction" doesn't include "fictional people" or "fictional locations", but just "works". Obviously we wouldn't expect real places to include "people" or "fictional locations" as subcategories—there might be exceptions—but the lack of certain subcategories doesn't seem to justify changing their scope so that they can't include things they normally would, but ought to include many things that they currently should not. P Aculeius (talk) 15:39, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Primitive painters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: these seem to be overlapping. SMasonGarrison 13:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as Naïve art and Primitivism explain, they are not the same. Naïve is art produced by untrained artists. Primitivism is trained artists imitating the style of naïve art or idealizing and aestheticizing Primitive art. --Jahaza (talk) 15:38, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Jahaza's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:09, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sandrine François songs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only one known entry within this category, and per WP:NSONG unlikely to be any further entries created. No need to retain this category given the single entry is listed in the parent article. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:07, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:One (band) songs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only one known entry within this category, and per WP:NSONG unlikely to be any further entries created. No need to retain this category given the single entry is listed in the parent article. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:07, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Communications authorities

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Clearer name.

Some things thrown in here are like government 'propaganda' media company regulators but if it's like telecom regulators or cable company regulators that should be 'Electronic communications authorities'. CaribDigita (talk) 02:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Shouldn't it become Category:Telecommunication authorities, similar to Category:Telecommunication? Marcocapelle (talk) 02:27, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I am actually seeking comment for proposing that get renamed also to "Cat:Electronic Communications" as well to get rid of this arbitrary weirdness of some- countries being "Cat:Communications in (country name)" while others are "Cat:Telecommunications in (country name). 1) Example: :Category:Telecommunications in the United Kingdom but then if you look inside the Pacific bloc. Everything inside Category:Communications in Oceania by territory or dependency is filed under ":Category:Communications in (country name)". This could all be flattened to a single tree of "Electronic Communications in (blank)" some countries have no "telecommunications" networks - Some have ripped all there legacy telecommunications networks out and now only have electronic "Communications" networks left. "Telecommunications" is archaic. Today, the true legacy phone ("telecommunications") companies like AT&T are ripping out their own PTSN networks and replacing it with the same fiberoptics and copper like cable companies. Or Fiber directly to premises. And further the legacy cable companies, now sell digital broadband phone services too. Meaning traditional phone companies now sell TV, and traditional tv providers now sell phone. They're all electronic communications companies now regardless of their history. And the lines are bluring. Companies like Meta/Facebook are now launching fiberopitics cables across the seabed but they aren't "Telecoms" in the true sense of the word. CaribDigita (talk) 13:29, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It would/should be a redirect right now because there's no reason to have both "Telecommuncations" & "electronic communications". But there's two categories still. That's the point I am making about the current category space there should just be one common one. Also "Amateur Ham Radio" can be under the Electronic Communications umbrella/ whereas it doesn't technically fall under "Telecommunications". Same for all satellites. Also Aircraft /airport homing beacons.. Some satellites are for example are ONLY weather satellites or other earth monitoring and don't do "telecommunications" (i.e. GPS only transmits- it's not designed to be a lot of two-way telecommunications) but all that could could fit under a neater sub-"Cat:Electronic communications".

  • Further comment:
  • Part of what I am envisioning in the grand scheme is flatten all of this into Electronic Communications.
    Then underneath you can have electronic communications by type:
    • Cat:Radio broadcasting(radiostations)
    • Cat:Television broadcasting(television stations)
    • Cat:Wireless/mobile providers
    • Cat:WANs / LANs (notable ones)
    • Cat:SONETS
    Also "Cat:Electronic communications standards by name": 802.11x, GSM, CDMA, Bluetooth, etc.
    "Cat: Electronic communications equipment manufacturers by type":
    • Telecom: Polycom, Nokia, Ericsson, etc.
    • Network and Switching equipment > Wireless Routers, Mobile phone towers, SONET, Wi-FI, etc.
    • Electronic communications regulators. i.e. FCC, OFCOM, etc.
    • Electronic communications standards consortia: Bell Labs, Cable Labs, EU's GSMArena, etc.
    A complete and total refresh and neatening up of everything electronic communications in essence. I am hoping it might revive new spirit to clean up and edit under this topic. CaribDigita (talk) 13:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:2020s German film stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Should also be merged into 2020s film stubs; {{2020s-Germany-film-stub}} has under 60 transclusions - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 20:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1980s Mexican film stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Should also be merged into 1980s film stubs, since there are less than 60 transclusions - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 21:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:02, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of Wikipedian humor

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unneeded WP:NARROWCAT. Upmerge to parent. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, should be upmerged. I'm assuming that the creator probably intended for more pages to be in there, but that wound up not being the case. Such a shame. I love the Department of Fun. Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 01:06, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:State departments of government efficiency of the United States

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: One-item category, can be easily covered in the main DOGE category. Maybe could be re-created later as there appear to be other DOGE organizations in other states, I do not believe any have created articles. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 00:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pages affiliated with the Supreme Cabal Regime of the English Wikipedia (SCREW)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Despite the name implying this is a project page category it instead appears to be a user category that fails WP:USERCAT for lacking any discernible collaborative function. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah long story was I was trying to use this with template categorization and... it didn't necessarily work the way I wanted it to, so please go ahead with the deletion per nom Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 01:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 16

[edit]

Category:Maternity hospitals in Somaliland

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. Only one page in here which isn't helpful for navigation SMasonGarrison 22:12, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Boroughs of Sweden

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To make it clear that these subdivisions are the administrative subdivisions of the municipality entities. These are all different administrative but not legally separate divisions, therefore merge Category:Boroughs of Sweden and Category:City districts in Sweden. The case of Landskrona does not match the municipal districts presented on the municipality website and they are only two in the category. Bromma and Hässelby-Vällingby are two current boroughs compared to Västerort. Since 2016, what was församlingar (parishes) are now distrikt (registration districts), so therefore it would be useful to add city to the Stockholm categories, as there also are some 20–30 registration districts in Stockholm. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 21:50, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New York state overly disambiguated

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: It is clear that the word state in non-parenthesis can be distinguished from the city of New York without having to follow the main page of New York (state). cookie monster 755 19:01, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Martial artists from Jharkhand

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary subcategory. Has only one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 18:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Burials in Yemen

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. This should only contain subcategories per OCLOCATION SMasonGarrison 13:59, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Burials in Namibia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. This should only contain subcategories per OCLOCATION SMasonGarrison 13:59, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Burials in Nauru

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. This should only contain subcategories per OCLOCATION SMasonGarrison 13:59, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Burials in Costa Rica

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. This should only contain subcategories per OCLOCATION SMasonGarrison 13:55, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Catholic University of West Africa alumni

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: University alumni category newly created for just one person. As always, universities do not automatically get their own dedicated alumni categories the moment one alumnus of that university has an article to file in it -- this would be fine if there were at least five people to file here, but is not needed for just one, and the university's "what links here" doesn't offer up four other alumni who could be filed here to salvage it. The other categories batched here, further, were all also newly created just to parent this, and will also be left empty if this goes. Navigation of Wikipedia is not aided by obsessively sifting everything down into the narrowest possible microcategories of just one thing. Bearcat (talk) 13:44, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Newly industrializing countries

[edit]
Convert Category:Newly industrializing countries to article Newly industrialized states-List
Nominator's rationale: This should be a list, not a category, given how vague and underdefined this label is SMasonGarrison 13:43, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Events by location

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: manually merge, this is follow-up on this earlier discussion about splitting "organized events" versus "anything that happened in the past". The above categories have become redundant after an "Organized events" subcategory has been created for each of them. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:08, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Aidan721, Jc37, Paul 012, LaundryPizza03, and Chipmunkdavis: pinging contributors to that earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:09, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Helsingborgs SS swimmers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: C2D Helsingborgs S. Category speedily moved 24 April but soon reverted. I haven't seen any intention to start a move discussion for the article after that. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 09:34, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Academics from Jamshedpur

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just four entries. Also propose merging-

All categories with three or less entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:27, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Legislative districts of Metro Manila

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These are not legislative districts of Metro Manila but rather legislative districts in Metro Manila. HueMan1 (talk) 07:12, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Leaders of Progressive Party of Maldives

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The category is grammarly incorrect and by adding "the" in the name it'll be correct. Unilandofma(Talk to me!) 06:06, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Leaders of People's National Congress (Maldives)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The category is grammarly incorrect and by adding "the" in the name it'll be correct. Unilandofma(Talk to me!) 06:04, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Angolan obstetricians and gynaecologists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Also merge with Category:Obstetricians and Category:Angolan physicians.

Also nominating for merge:

Category:Hollywood Studio Symphony albums

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant layer. Upmerge sole subcategory (unless anyone things that one should be merged into this instead which might also be a sensible solution). QuietHere (talk | contributions) 04:59, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hollywood Studio Symphony

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary eponymous category with only one subcategory with actual content. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 04:08, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:00, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request to change Turkmenistan to Turkmenistani for these categories

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Should be renamed to better match the demonym (see Asian sportspeople stubs for example) - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 03:47, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support might also be worth looking at Category:Turkmenistan people stubs and Category:Turkmenistan people Waacstats (talk) 07:19, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Taiwanese canoeist stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There's only one other article in the category, alongside the template... - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 03:38, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support, upmerge template to Taiwanese sportspeople stubs and canoeist stubs. Waacstats (talk) 07:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Belgian Baroque composers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, Belgium did not exist at the time and, while the target is not entirely accurate either, there is certainly no reason to have two parallel categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:22, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Beach House EPs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary with only one entry. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 15

[edit]

Category:Burials in Mozambique

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. This is a container category per WP:OCLOCATION SMasonGarrison 23:27, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bus Services Act 2017

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. There are only two pages in here that are already interlinked. SMasonGarrison 22:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Brenda Hale, Baroness Hale of Richmond

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. There are only two pages in here, the eponymous page and the autobiography they wrote SMasonGarrison 22:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Equality Act 2010

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's no need to have two pages in here by themselves. It's the main act and an amendment to the act. SMasonGarrison 22:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Western Götaland

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category description reads they are "statistical district[s]" but that is not described in article space. All relevant municipalities in Category:Municipalities of Västra Götaland County. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 21:35, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Stockholm urban area

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: After having removed articles from outside of Stockholm urban area, the category now mostly overlaps with Category:Neighbourhoods of Stockholm as most are neighbourhoods. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 21:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Metropolitan Stockholm

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Metropolitan Stockholm spans, since 2005, the same area as the whole Stockholm County and the selection of articles in Category:Metropolitan Stockholm doesn't justify its own category. All articles already in Category:Stockholm County subcategories. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 21:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chefs from Yokohama

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Also merge to Category:Japanese chefs

Also propose merging-

Category:Chefs from Kobe to Category:People from Kobe and Category:Japanese chefs

Category with three entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 17:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Events in the Arab world

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, a category for pan-Arab events might be useful but better start that from scratch. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cities in fiction

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cycle racing

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 21:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: At the moment there is:

Cycle racing has three main aspects:

W like wiki good to know 13:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Coconut plantations in Aruba

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Plantations in Aruba. Gjs238 (talk) 16:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Plantations (settlements or colonies)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant with parent category Category:Plantations Gjs238 (talk) 12:10, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Caitlín R. Kiernan

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEPON. Covered by Category:Works by Caitlín R. Kiernan --woodensuperman 11:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lords Spiritual (Women) Act 2015

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Lords Spiritual (Women) Act 2015 is not a defining feature for any of the women in this category, and doesn't seem to help with navigation, given that all of the women are linked to the main article. SMasonGarrison 05:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how it is any less necessary than lc|Category:Hereditary peers removed under the House of Lords Act 1999 or Category:Hereditary peers elected under the House of Lords Act 1999. Landpin (talk) 06:30, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People educated at Gunnersbury Boys' School

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The article for the school is Gunnersbury Catholic School. It seems like this category should match the name being used for the school's article per my reading of WP:TOPICCAT. But I'm not sure. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 01:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Companies involved in the Gaza genocide

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is not a defining characteristic of these companies. The Bushranger One ping only 00:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose : the category can exist - just like Category:Companies involved in the Holocaust - however addition of a company to said category can always be disputed. The rational for why these companies are added to the list can be found here List of companies involved in the Gaza genocide Cinaroot (talk) 00:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. That doesn't make it defining for any of these companies. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have cited several reliable source here I agree not all companies should be added to this category - especially if their involvement is minimal or on-time. But how can you say this category cannot exist - when a similar category already exist for holocaust What makes the companies listed in holocaust category have defining characteristics - while companies involved in Gaza genocide supposedly do not?
Lets take one particular example Barclays - according to [2] - "Barclays is actively arming, supporting and profiting from Israel’s apartheid regime and its genocidal violence against the Palestinian people.". There is a whole document detailing their involvement.
Executives of several companies have acknowledged their involvement and some CEO outspoken pro-Israel views. Lockheed Martin executives has highlighted the conflicts in Israel and Ukraine as potential opportunities for future revenue growth. CEO of NextVision, an Israeli startup said "wars are good for business". This guardian article talks about how wall street is hoping for an explosion in profit from violence in Israel and Gaza.
While the defining characteristics of the companies currently listed in the category may be disputed, I believe I can make a strong case for other companies that have not yet been added. Additions to the list can be contested and removed individually, but the category itself should not be deleted—at least not yet—as long as there is even one company that clearly belongs in it.
cc @Buidhe @Gidonb @Marcocapelle Cinaroot (talk) 16:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Also as long as there is even one company that clearly belongs in it Unless it's part of a well-established broad category tree, single-item categories are frowned upon. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The argument that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS cannot be used to justify this category cuts both ways. If the Holocaust-related category is seen as valid under WP:DEFINING, then it becomes essential to explain why a comparable category about Gaza is not. We’re not talking about stuff—we’re talking about structurally analogous categories with similar scope and sourcing patterns.
Regarding WP:NONDEFINING: Some companies have substantial and well-sourced involvement in the current Gaza conflict—from weapons provision and logistics to financial backing. This is not peripheral involvement. Some executives have made public statements acknowledging or even promoting their company’s role. That constitutes a defining association by Wikipedia standards. Just because not all companies belong doesn’t invalidate the category; it only means inclusion should be case-by-case.
the “single-item category” argument should apply only when there is no reasonable expectation of growth. This is a category with active sourcing and growing editorial interest, not a stub with no future.
Deleting the category same day it was added preempts ongoing consensus-building and undermines the usual editorial process. If individual entries are weak, they can be challenged per WP:V and WP:NPOV. But the existence of the category itself is justifiable just like Category:Companies involved in the Holocaust Cinaroot (talk) 22:28, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
then it becomes essential to explain why a comparable category about Gaza is not. No, it does not. This is not peripheral involvement. It may not be, but it is also not defining to the company, no matter what the executitves have said. Deleting the category same day it was added preempts ongoing consensus-building and undermines the usual editorial process. Which is why it's not being 'deleted the same day it was added', CfD lasts a week and builds a consensus. The fact another category exists is absoutely irrelevant to whether or not this one should. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:04, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 14

[edit]

Category:Canonical Augustinian popes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This appears to be Canons Regular who are part of the Augustinians anyway, so per WP:OVERLAPCAT. Brandmeistertalk 19:32, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sport in Scandinavia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Most international/inter-national competitions, championships and cooperation are on Nordic level, as seen in the first mentioned category, as well as in Category:Inter-Nordic sports competitions (a potential category child). Category:Ice hockey in Scandinavia and child only group the three country categories. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 19:28, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Olympic sportspeople convicted of crimes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Trivial intersection of type of sports competition and outside-sporting career. The parent was deleted in 2012 and 2013, but since then recreated. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 19:06, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English female characters in soap operas

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Extremely specific - whilst the British and English female character templates have 100s of pages, the Welsh, Northern Irish and Scottish ones only have a few, and the British and English ones seem to be used interchangeably, so I believe the NI, Welsh, English and Scottish ones should be merged (not all of the categories obviously, just "female characters in soap operas". If someone could please add Category:Northern Irish female characters in soap operas, Category:Scottish female characters in soap operas and Category:Welsh female characters in soap operas to this nomination that would help as I don't know how to do it on twinkle DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 15:19, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Activists from Okayama

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Also merge to Category:People from Okayama

Also nominate for merging- Category:Activists from Akita (city) to Category:Activists from Akita Prefecture and Category:People from Akita (city)

Both categories have just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 14:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Children's books set in early modern history

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, mostly one- or two-article categories, which is not helpful for navigation. After 1600 some articles are possibly already in a fiction by year category which necessitates a manual merge. The 1770s and 1780s should also be manually merged to the other target because most articles are already in Category:Children's books set during the American Revolutionary War. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Australian nuclear medicine physicians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Also merge with Category:Australian medical doctors.

Also nominating for merge:

Category:Chinese andrologists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry and also merge with Category:Chinese physicians.

Also nominating for merge:

Category:Belgian palliative care physicians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Also merge with Category:Belgian physicians.

Also nominating for merge:

Category:Mister International Philippines

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories SMasonGarrison 02:27, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, they are obviously duplicates. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:34, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and clarify distinction: I can understand your saying "obviously", but Mister International Philippines 2024 is not a duplicate of Mister International 2024 (Philippines). The competition split into two factions in 2023. See the intro paragraph at Mister International (Philippines) and second paragraph of Mister International 2022. I don't fully understand the timing as Mister International Philippines 2022 (held in June 2022) states that it was inaugural, whereas the other pages state that the split happened the next year. – Fayenatic London 13:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmmm... do we have any other examples of categories that have made similar splits? I'd love to not reinvent the wheel. SMasonGarrison 13:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Hi, just to be clear—the page story represents a series of organizational disputes to provide context. It began in 2022 at the Mister International 2022 pageant in the Philippines, around October. The event was conducted by the Philippines' national director, Manuel Deldio. At that time in history the pageant appeared to be operating normally. Pradinut of Thailand and Deldio of the Philippines were both national directors in their respective countries and were reportedly close at the time to the founder of the pageant Alan Sim who created Mister International in 2006 in Singapore. That was also the time in history that the Philippines had the Vice President position in the Mister International organization. The problems began in October of 2022, when the founder, Alan Sim, died. Both parties took that as the point of conflict, each claiming to be the rightful owner of the pageant. In 2023, each party had a press conference to assert their claims of leadership. The side of the Philippines argued that Alan had passed along the leadership to them, since Deldio was in the line of Succession as Vice President. The side of Thailand claimed that the leadership was passed along to Pradinut, since he was a close friend of Sim. To bolster their positions, the Philippine side continued utilizing the legacy Mister International logo, stating it was for the legacy, while the Thailand side had a new logo for a new chapter of the pageant. In 2023 both sides had separate editions of the pageant. In the Philippines, this was reflected in the Mister International Philippines 2023 national pageant, produced through the Mister International brand claimed by Deldio. Mister Pilipinas Worldwide sent a representative to the version in Thailand. Essentially, I made the categories separately distinguishing them with the identifiers "(Philippines)" and "(Thailand)" to delineate them from the two existing international pageants. The Mister International Philippines category is different from Mister International (Philippines) - they are related, but not the same. 🌼𝓡𝓬 𝓡𝓪𝓶𝔃🍁 (talk) 23:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the most recent comment (by the creator)?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Local Now affiliates

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There are currently no affiliates for this network anymore. This is mostly a FAST channel now. OWaunTon (talk) 19:41, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There are three pages in the category. SMasonGarrison 22:10, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but they no longer affiliated with the network. OWaunTon (talk) 00:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I have restored all pages removed from the category. Discussion on whether the category should continue to exist would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I have the evidence it is now longer needed, on RabbitEars here: https://www.rabbitears.info/search.php?request=network_search&network=Local+Now
It's no longer on station affiliates. OWaunTon (talk) 02:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 13

[edit]

Category:Fictional characters with narcissist personality disorder

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The name of the disorder is "narcissistic personality disorder" not "narcissist personality disorder" Prezbo (talk) 20:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I removed one article for not mentioning this, before I realized that none of these articles mention this. not one! Most don't even say narcissistic! SHODAN??? The ones that do say narcissistic don't mention it in reference to a personality disorder... the trait is not the personality disorder. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:08, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did you check every article in the category? If so I would agree that delete is the way to go. Prezbo (talk) 23:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I ctrl+fed "narcissistic" and "narcissist" in every article but I also did that in about 3 minutes so it may not have been perfect. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:05, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:White nationalism in Ohio

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: None of the articles in this category mention white nationalism. White nationalism as a term is not synonymous with other forms of racism, white supremacy, neo-Nazism (which are used), etc. it is not the catch all category and using it as such is original research, otherwise we may as well collapse all the neo-nazi/white supremacy/white nationalist trees into one. All white nationalism is white supremacy but not all white supremacy is white nationalist. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:52, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this is really a problem with all three of these category trees, we are basically using them all as synonyms despite in theory having separate trees, but I want to see what people think so I'm trying this one out first. A lot of articles in the "White nationalism" tree do not actually use the word white nationalism, even if it is, this is a fairly modern term. If other people think using it in categories where the term isn't mentioned because it's an overarching term is fine, but i want to see where the consensus is. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Duns Scotus

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created unnecessary duplication of Category:Scotism Gjs238 (talk) 19:13, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Platformization

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created category containing two articles about South Africa. Don't see the need for such a category or what category tree to place it in. Gjs238 (talk) 15:30, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Gjs238 and thanks for your nomination. When a goldfish swims around a goldfish bowl, do you think that they notice the water? Or do you think that they assume that this unbiqitous 24/7 water all around them is normal? Thomas Poell (Q112521148) et al, suggests that our “infrastructures, economic processes and government frameworks” not to mention our cultural and social practices are being reorganized around these platforms.[1] From holidays (Air BnB), entertainment, (Netflix), transport (Uber) etc right to reading, banking, higher education. Our society is being platformatized. Now in some parts of the world, that platformatization has become normalized. In other parts, it is still unfamilar. Derek J Moore (talk) 15:43, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I previously came across this a couple of days ago and considered listing it for WP:CFD myself, but I couldn't figure out how to articulate a coherent summary of my concerns. It's not altogether clear what the word even means in this context — although we do have the article platform economy, it's not shedding a whole lot of light on how the general concept of "platformization" would be all that strongly defining of the individual contents here: in the broadest sense, every website or database that exists at all could be described as a "platform", and I'm not seeing how we would distinguish between projects that would belong here and projects that wouldn't, thus making it essentially an WP:INDISCRIMINATE category for every single technology project that exists. Bearcat (talk) 18:40, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 01:58, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:23, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:State elections

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, aligning with parent Category:Politics of country subdivisions, a more general name because not in every country a subdivision is called "state". Marcocapelle (talk) 14:21, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - an interesting proposal. To me the word subdivision does not only mean state, it can mean anything on a local level. I think state elections refer to Category:State politics. Moondragon21 (talk) 16:42, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I think subdivisions include a lot more than just "States", so the separation is valid. -Samoht27 (talk) 16:59, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am in favor of creating a separate category -Samoht27 (talk) 17:03, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So am I. Moondragon21 (talk) 05:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Czech Renaissance humanists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, consistent with Category:16th-century Czech people and Category:17th-century Czech people redirecting to Category:16th-century people from Bohemia and Category:17th-century people from Bohemia. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:17, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Czech classical composers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, consistent with Category:17th-century Czech people and Category:18th-century Czech people redirecting to Category:17th-century people from Bohemia and Category:18th-century people from Bohemia. Also consistent with parent Category:Classical composers from Bohemia. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:08, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Plays set in antiquity

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, these are single-article categories, which is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:32, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Water taxis

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: According to the main article, "The term water taxi is usually confined to a boat operating on demand, and water bus to a boat operating on a schedule. In North American usage, the terms are roughly synonymous." Since the reader should be able to identify a category's scope from its title, this category should be renamed to make clear that it is inclusive of both types of services. Paul_012 (talk) 10:54, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia categories named after counties of Sweden

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: County categories are properly listed in Category:Counties of Sweden. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 10:53, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, two separate categories for the same thing, simultaneously ignores and accepts the existence of sub-categories. -Samoht27 (talk) 16:57, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anne Murray

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Does note meet the threshold of WP:OCEPON, covered by works tree. --woodensuperman 08:51, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with the additional items found to further populate the category. Thanks Misterpither. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:34, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Deborah Cox

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Does note meet the threshold of WP:OCEPON, covered by works tree. --woodensuperman 08:50, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note. I nominated this category 15 years ago with a surprising (to me) result of no consensus. See WP:CfD/2010 Aug 13. The category creator hasn't edited since 2013. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 16:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jonah Hill

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Does not meet the threshold for WP:OCEPON. Covered by "Works" tree. --woodensuperman 08:36, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Television stations in the Grand Rapids–Kalamazoo–Battle Creek market

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with main article's name; don't want to use Nielsen market name Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:27, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Television stations in Columbia, Missouri

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with main article's name; it's more than one city Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:22, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nomination. -Samoht27 (talk) 20:07, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The Crusaders albums

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Propose merging the two categories into one (renaming as well to follow the current name of the group's article) as the group dropped "Jazz" from the name in the early 1970s. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:23, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 12

[edit]

Category:Volleyball players from Nagasaki

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Also merge to Category:Sportspeople from Nagasaki Prefecture

Categories with just one or two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 22:51, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of populated places in Nepal

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:04, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Maxwell–Boltzmann statistics

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Duel upmerge for now. There's only two pages in here, one of which is a redirect SMasonGarrison 21:04, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fashion entrepreneurs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, "entrepreneur" is a too subjective label for any individual businessperson. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:04, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Good catch! SMasonGarrison 21:05, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Early patriarchs of Alexandria

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename/merge, anachronistic and non-NPOV names. At least until 451 (and arguably until 536) there weren't separate popes of the Coptic Orthodox Church. I have not added the 5th-century category yet, pending the outcome of the discussion further below on this page. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:29, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Marcocapelle I'm not principally opposed to your nomination, but procedurally, I think we would need to change the article titles in the mainspace first. From Pope Anianus of Alexandria onwards, all article titles start with Pope ... of Alexandria. Catnames only follow the mainspace (WP:C2D). Fortunately for you (and me), the main articles are Patriarch of Alexandria and List of patriarchs of Alexandria, and the patent category is Category:Patriarchs of Alexandria, so a case for WP:TITLECON with "Patriarch" instead of "Pope" could be made. I'm not sure if there has been a community decision to name all early Alexandrian patriachs "Popes" (possibly for a good reason) or that one user did all this, but I'm sure we could find that out with a little digging. Cheers, NLeeuw (talk) 13:01, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
PS: From what I gather, the designation "Papa Abba" in Alexandria was more of an honorific like "His Holiness" than a title describing the office position. (One unsourced claim asserts that the word "pope" was not used in opposition to the bishop of Rome in the question of Papal primacy, although I very much doubt that.) After the 561 schism, English Wikipedia seems to reserve the word "pope" only for highest official of the Coptic Orthodox Church, while all other categories such as Latin, Greek Catholic and Greek Orthodox continue calling the office "Patriarch of Alexandria". I've got no principal objection against calling all office-holders prior to 561 "patriarchs", but it's probably a good idea to establish consensus on renaming the article titles first. NLeeuw (talk) 13:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Nederlandse Leeuw: I have zero experience in nominating a large group of articles for renaming, any chance you can help me? Marcocapelle (talk) 13:55, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle Sure! In this case, I think the most relevant WikiProject talk page might be the best place to do so, but let me check the guidelines on how to do this.
    First, I'd like to check whether there was ever a community decision for this naming format or not. If there wasn't, we could just manually rename them all one by one per WP:TITLECON + WP:BOLD, with no need for a discussion process. (Courtesy would have us set up a discussion anyway, just to make sure we're having consensus; but it's not strictly necessary if there hasn't been a naming consensus for this set of articles so far).
    There are also special gadgets for mass nominations, I think I already installed that. It's a bit late tonight, but maybe tomorrow? You can always ping me in case I forget. :) NLeeuw (talk) 21:13, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    PS: I think I found the cause of the problem already. MOS:PATRI contradicts MOS:POPES. All article titles about patriarchs such as patriarchs of Alexandria should start with "patriarch", but all article titles about Catholic or Coptic popes should start with "pope". The problem is that there are currently 4 different Christian denominations who all claim that their apostolic succession of the See of Alexandria starts with Saint Mark the Evangelist, so technically speaking, all articles about the guy of Alexandria before 561 should technically simultaneously start with "patriarch" AND "pope". That's impossible, of course. But using the title "Pope" implies that only the Coptic Orthodox Church has legitimacy, while using "Patriarch" implies that they do not, but the other 3 do. Given that 3 out of the 4 denominations use "patriarch", however, I think this is the least POV title we could use (too bad for the Copts). Plus, the main articles are still Patriarch of Alexandria and List of patriarchs of Alexandria. NLeeuw (talk) 21:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Diplomats of the Habsburg Netherlands

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge / rename and re-parent per actual content, all articles are about people active after 1556 in the Spanish Netherlands. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:18, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Towns by country

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: manually merge, "town" has a different meaning in every country, some countries do not even distinguish between towns and cities, therefore we have been in a long process to merge them to "populated places". This nomination is a tiny part of that process. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:08, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Most articles and subcategories will already be in a Populated places by country subdivision category, therefore the proposal is to merge manually rather than automatically. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:22, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Redundant at lease for Sudan. FuzzyMagma (talk) 11:50, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongy and viciously oppose wholesale nomination, exactly because "town" has a different meaning in every country and because some cuontries officially distinguish between city and town, e.g., in Lithuania: miestas vs. miestelis or in Romania, municipiu vs. oraș. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and should not cater ignorance of an average Englishman who does not care how these backwards indigenes and troglodytes call themselves. --Altenmann >talk 15:46, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • P.S. I am even mildly surprized: a village is also a "populated place" Why not throw them, into the same barrel? After all, some villages are larger than some towns. --Altenmann >talk 15:52, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • P.P.S. Regarding Category:Towns in Belarus, there is weird split against category:Cities in Belarus - there is no such distinction in Belarus (and in Wikipedia as well, see List of cities and towns in Belarus, and I made my own nomination in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 May 5#Category:Cities in Belarus. --Altenmann >talk 16:00, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • P.P.P.S. Concluding, there is indeed a mess with categorization of settlements, but it must be fixed on country-by-country basis, but I do not know, who even cares? --Altenmann >talk 16:03, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • At least one point I agree with: the distinction between villages and towns can be equally arbitrary as the distinction between cities and towns. But villages should better wait until towns have been sorted out. I also agree with the fact that towns can have a specific meaning in a country, but then it is often a matter of official status more than that it substantively means something. Besides grouping them together as Category:Towns by country does not make much sense. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • I looked into Category:Towns by country and see an example for good solution: category:Cities and towns in Norway. Therefore I invite country "stewards" to review your known countries whether they have legal distinction between town and city in whatever form or name and report the findings in the list above, and,
        1. if no distinction, then merge into "cities and towns in XXX" and clearly say in the "category statute" this
        2. if yes distinction, them leave 'as is' and clearly say in the "category statutes" that they not same and cross-link the two in the hatnote
        3. if unknown, then, well, tough luck.
      As a proud descendant of P-LC I will take care of Belarus (listed here), Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine, and Romania (listed here). --Altenmann >talk 21:15, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Altenmann: what do you mean with legal distinction? For example. There may be a law that says that e.g. a minister, or the parliament, may decide to grant a village the status of town, while there is no law that specifies any legal advantages of being a town instead of a village. In that case I would argue that the distinction, while formally legal, is trivial in practice. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:04, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • You known what? that's exactly what is done: a settlement may change its status by a legislative act. But this is never a trivial decision and not a trivial distinction, and what is more, it is not for a wikipedian to decide, whether this is trivial or not. --Altenmann >talk 04:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • Of course I do not want Wikipedia to decide whether it is trivial. Whether town status provides additional legal benefits is something that can be established objectively. I expect that in most countries legal benefits are provided only to administrative subdivisions, not to populated places. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:33, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        Maybe not benefits, but different official treatment certainly. --Altenmann >talk 08:09, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Put is it then better to use “populated place” rather than focusing on whether it’s a village, town, city or a any type of settlement. FuzzyMagma (talk) 05:48, 6 May 2025 (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, BlasterOfHouses (HouseBlaster's alt • talk • he/they) 04:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Named on Saudi Arabia's list of most wanted suspected terrorists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is my first attempt at a rename; I'd love for a better suggestion. This category name is lacking a noun. FWIW, the page name is Saudi list of most-wanted suspected terrorists. SMasonGarrison 21:54, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:5th-century Patriarchs of Alexandria

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category, to either merge or turn into a subcat of the latter. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 13:26, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not seeing an objection to the nomination (just a suggestion for further nominations). If you do object, please speak up!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:11, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Women's football in West Germany

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: If this should be a seperate category from Category:Women's football in Germany then I suggest to to clearly explain this in the top section of the category page. If not I suggest to merge both categories. Robby (talk) 15:30, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:10, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1st-century texts in Latin

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: manually merge, isolated category, this is not useful for navigation. Manually merge because most articles are already in Category:1st-century inscriptions and Category:Latin inscriptions. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose: Why and how is this not "helpful for navigation"? This cross-category is defining/neutral/verifiable and precise and can therefore be kept. It currently contains 5 pages but can obviously contain more. -Mushy Yank. 18:58, 26 April 2025 (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) 00:27, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:07, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Children's books set in ancient history and Middle Ages

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, mostly 1- or 2-article categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose: I find it helpful (how is it not helpful for navigation?) and I can't see why, when precise defining/neutral/verifiable categories exist, we should merge them into extremely broad ones covering centuries. It is not only unnecessary, it is detrimental to the project in my opinion. As for the number of articles contained (if that is relevant), one contains 6 pages, another 4 and a subcat!) and was a WP:BEFORE performed to check that those categories cannot contain more pages, anyway? -Mushy Yank. 18:52, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BlasterOfHouses (HouseBlaster's alt • talk • he/they) 00:19, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:07, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Festivals in North America by country and region

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content of the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:44, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The King of Queens episodes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains one article and one subcategory. (Oinkers42) (talk) 02:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Faerie Tale Theatre episodes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains one article and one subcategory. (Oinkers42) (talk) 02:12, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Red vs. Blue episodes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains one article and one subcategory. The article is already in the parent, but I am suggesting merge due to the subcategory. (Oinkers42) (talk) 02:11, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 11

[edit]

Category:Kiev-class aircraft carriers of the Indian Navy

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category remains small for a long time. It has only 1 page. Wareon (talk) 21:31, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of festivals by continent and city

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer, this is the only subcategory of the target. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Currently, consensus favors merging Category:Lists of festivals by city. Should Category:Lists of festivals by continent and city also be merged?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:45, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ethnic Hungarian people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, largely overlapping scope. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:55, 11 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Category:Volleyball players from Nagano (city)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Categories with just one or two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 17:45, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sports competitions in Europe by region

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, none of the five subcategories is properly about a region. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:03, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:19, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:LGBTQ law enforcement workers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I think we should rename this to match the parent. SMasonGarrison 14:22, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Majestic-class aircraft carriers of the Indian Navy

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category remains small for a long time. It has only 1 page. Wareon (talk) 12:26, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • It may be part of established trees but the article is better off in the root of those trees so that navigation to related articles becomes easier. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It is part of a tree is never a valid argument against deletion of a category with only 1 item in it. I could create a category that sits in 32 trees, but if it contains only 1 article and the intersection is trivial, then I can argue that my category is part of 32 trees until the cows come home, but it will be deleted (and rightly so). NLeeuw (talk) 23:06, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sports competitions at Olympia (Helsingborg)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: An arena that has hosted specific sports events or concerts, to be avoided for categorisation according to WP:OCVENUE. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 08:55, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People who have sacrificed their lives to save others

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING and sacrifice itself is perhaps POV. Countless articles would needed to be included in here if this were to be populated. Gotitbro (talk) 08:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This has been discussed before: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_December_24#Category:People_who_have_sacrificed_their_lives_to_save_others
This is just deletionism and doesn't help Wikipedia as a project. Blockhaj (talk) 08:23, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now we are at it, we still should rename the category. Several better names were mentioned in the previous discussion, e.g. Category:People who died due to efforts to save lives. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:25, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thats an unconventional description. Selfsacrifice and thereof is the status quo. Blockhaj (talk) 11:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The "no consensus" result of the previous CFD, with the recommendation to seek a rename in the future, should be taken into account. I am opposed to deletion based only on arguments used before in that discussion, because there is no reason to rehash those again. NLeeuw (talk) 12:25, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Listify based on WP:CSC. Given the disputable nature of all claimed self-sacrifices, and the risk of WP:POV, I think this collection of articles is unfit for a category, because categories – as a project space – cannot provide WP:RS for contestable claims. The only way to make this fit for Wikipedia is to have consistent selection criteria, and reliable sources to back the claims up. Otherwise, anyone can claim anything without the need to prove it. Self-sacrifice in particular can easily get out of control without a properly defined scope, e.g. some people may claim that Christian martyrs died to "save" the "souls" of "others" in the "afterlife", and so such martyrs should all be included, even though there is no objective evidence of any afterlife, let alone Christian versions of it. And so on. Plus, are we only to count those scenarios in which the self-sacrifice was a "success", or also those who tried but "failed" (either because they didn't die or "the others" didn't survive)? Surely we Wikipedians are not in a position to adjudicate the intentions and outcomes of such actions. Even reliable sources may sometimes not be able to answer such questions. NLeeuw (talk) 12:33, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:15th-century Spanish naval officers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 04:39, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:19th-century Royal Danish Navy personnel

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer SMasonGarrison 03:41, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Attacks motivated by the white genocide conspiracy theory

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I do not think it is defining and as I see some entries are not substantiated by article text; I guess, wikipedians' opinions. I never heard (of many things I never heard of :) about verdicts of this type, so I guiess it is a subjective classification, even if by experts. --Altenmann >talk 02:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Women sentenced to life imprisonment

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I'm not convinced that we need to diffuse criminal sentence by gender. I'd love other people's thoughts on this. SMasonGarrison 02:43, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because I do think there's a noteworthy distinction, similar to Category:Women sentenced to death and Category:Executed women. AHI-3000 (talk) 16:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just because it's noteworthy, doesn't meet it meets the bar of EGRS. SMasonGarrison 23:17, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Veneti malavitosi

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. under populated category SMasonGarrison 02:36, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Single entry band members categories

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per long-standing consensus as noted at Category:Musicians by band, band member categories are not needed when only one member has an article. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:58, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominating the following categories for the same reason:

Older discussions

[edit]

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

For older closed and unclosed discussions, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 8 to 21 days.

  1. ^ 10.14763/2019.4.1425
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/All_current_discussions&oldid=1267842097"