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 03:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 88 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]
  • @Nederlandse Leeuw: doesn't this expand the scope a lot? I am not sure but I can imagine the Serbian Orthodox Church shares sainthood recognition with most of its sister churches. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:38, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Marcocapelle Not really. For comparison, look at Template:Serbian Orthodox saints, which has also already been retitled Saints of the Serbian Orthodox Church. NLeeuw (talk) 08:21, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Nederlandse Leeuw: I don't think a retitling of a template says a lot. According to [1] the Eastern Orthodox churches recognize each others' saints by default. So it should at least become something like Category:Saints declared by the Serbian Orthodox Church, in order to clarify that it is not about recognition. But that in turn may raise verification issues with saints from long time ago. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:53, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I think that if you've got an issue with the phrase/concept Saints of the Serbian Orthodox Church as such, it is best discussed at Talk:List of saints of the Serbian Orthodox Church. I'm only suggesting to bring the category name in conformity with the main article. If it is true that Eastern Orthodox churches automatically recognise whatever saint was canonised by any one of them, then I may even agree with you, and would suggest renaming the main article to List of saints canonised/canonized by the Serbian Orthodox Church or something. In other words, it would be a list of canonisations made by Church X rather than a list of saints recognised by Church X, otherwise we would indeed get a lot of unnecessary WP:OVERLAP. NLeeuw (talk) 18:19, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      FYI: Marcocapelle and I decided to indeed take the discussion over to the talk page. I invite others to participate. I expect it will take some time to reach consensus, so I shall withdraw for now. (Taking it to full CFD will not help at this stage, as it will de-centralise the discussion.) NLeeuw (talk) 01:43, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold pending other discussion

[edit]
  • None currently

Moved to full discussion

[edit]

Current discussions

[edit]
Shortcut

October 27

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:British male tennis players

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I'm bringing this to CFD because @Crowsus: has requested it. I see no reason why this category should be the non-diffusing parent per WP:DIFFUSE. @Zyxw: made it so in 2020 [2] without any discussion I can find. Mason (talk) 02:01, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I would also ask that whatever outcome is reached here be considered to be applied to other groupings of British sportspeople, particularly Swimmers, Cyclists and Athletes (and obviously the subcategories thereof, where created) which have also had this non-diffusing header added. I have already recently gone through these and 'doubled' them for all articles where I can discern which part of the UK they were from, so if it is agreed that they should be removed from British if the home nation is known, the only remainders in the British parent should be the sparsely-sourced stubs or other unusual circumstances of each person. I did ask somewhere (can't remember where, trying to find it) for an explanation on why that non-diffusing thing had been chosen 9and was it a community consensus, but IIRC it was a project without a lot of interaction and nobody replied. Crowsus (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]



October 26

[edit]

Category:Private schools Northern Beaches Sydney

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category created by a private school, duplicates and doesn't improve on the existing categorisation scheme at Category:Private schools in Sydney and subcategories such as Category:Private secondary schools in Sydney. AusLondonder (talk) 11:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Nomination favors deletion – should we merge? If so, to which targets?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:07, 26 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]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. A wrestling promotion =/= McDonald. Dozens of wrestlers and wrestling personalities have worked for AEW, and many of them just appeared in one match or dark matches. And don't forget cameo appearances. As I mentioned, the navbox and the list cover this topic. Plus List of former All Elite Wrestling personnel exists too. --Mann Mann (talk) 22:19, 18 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) 19:31, 19 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) 22:54, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Settlement of the pro-Japanese collaboration

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Not sure what the best name for this category is; it's currently grammatically incorrect, and doesn't match parent category Category:Korean collaborators with Imperial Japan. seefooddiet (talk) 18:42, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I do not see Marcocapelle's comment as opposing a rename; if anyone does oppose a rename please speak up :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:54, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alta California before 1824

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, according to article Alta California, the province was called The/Las Californias until 1804 (and also contained Baja California) and was called Nueva California until 1824. Instead of The Californias as a rename target I would also be fine with Province of Las Californias, per article title Province of Las Californias. When there is no opposition I will add the year categories to the nomination too. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Large bundled nomination; relisting to give extra time for objections.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:53, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Should it be "The Californias" instead of "the Californias"? Mason (talk) 02:07, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Online-only games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is not a defining trait, mostly because it not executed properly (can you imagine all browser games that require WIFI in existence already?) it also heavily conflicts Category:Multiplayer online games which mostly contains games only having a multiplayer online mode QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:42, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why not merge and leave as a redirect? That would reduce the chances of this being created again. Mason (talk) 03:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge and redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:51, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Republican cities of Latvia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, according to Administrative divisions of Latvia the correct name is state city. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:04, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chaoyang County

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Largely duplicative category containing a single article. Unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 15:17, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Skelton-in-Cleveland

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing only the main article and an article about a long-defunct railway station. Merging to parent is more suitable categorisation. AusLondonder (talk) 15:05, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hatherleigh

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing only the main article and an article about a long-defunct railway station. Merging to parent is more suitable categorisation. AusLondonder (talk) 14:59, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Benwick

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing only an article about a village already in the parent category and a defunct railway, better categorised in the parent. AusLondonder (talk) 14:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:MultiVersus characters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I feel like, unlike Category:Super Smash Bros. fighters, this category would not be considered WP:DEFINING for any of the characters involved. (Oinkers42) (talk) 14:03, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Towns and villages in Latvia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with two (very obvious) subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:30, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Vehicle-building video games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I'm not getting much that confirms a "vehicle-building" genre really exists. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Secernentea

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WoRMS and the article on Secernentea agree that this taxon is no longer in use. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:49, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:SubGenii by nationality

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redudant category layer Mason (talk) 00:43, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hong Kong–Saudi Arabia relations

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. This category is extremely narrow intersection that really doesn't have sufficient pages to population it. (I looked) Mason (talk) 00:37, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films scored by Naved Parvez

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Naved Parvez was deleted in 2020. This category was created in 2024 and has 9 articles. I'm not sure if this category is needed as Parvez doesn't have an article. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:09, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 25

[edit]

Category:Chancellors of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overlaping categories. If not merged, the older category should be renamed rather than reverse merged. Mason (talk) 23:40, 25 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge Category:Mosques of Leicestershire? I am not seeing objections to renaming if kept.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:27, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting question. Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:07, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reformed Christianity

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Now that the main article has been moved to the correct title, these categories should also be moved according to the C2D criteria ('Consistency with the main article's name'). --Humpser (talk) 18:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should "reformed" be capitalized?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:04, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • In the Netherlands they were also sort of synonymous, though Calvinist usually referred to the doctrine of the church and reformed was in the name of the church (Dutch Reformed Church etc.). In the Dutch situation, Arminians are considered to be neither Calvinists nor reformed, so the rename is perfectly ok. In Switzerland the rename is particularly useful because Calvinism and Zwinglianism quickly merged to reformed. That fits with Olson's statement quoted above that reformed is broader than Calvinist. Renaming the categories to reformed does not harm in that case (possibly there could be a Calvinist subcategory but I do not expect so.) If the rename is a problem somewhere else than in the US, Netherlands or Switzerland, I'd like to hear specifically in which country. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:08, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Lean opposed. Wouldn't this narrow the category? This seems like making a lot of extra work and narrow the category. Mason (talk) 02:14, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Titles held only by one person

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The corresponding article for this topic was deleted a year ago, and I don't think this topic is particularly notable or likely to be covered in academic sources. Векочел (talk) 22:27, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Most of these are short-lived political offices. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:19, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Petroleum industry in Turkey

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing one article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 19:27, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just noticed there is also a category called ‘Petroleum in Turkey’ so I put the page there instead. So as category now empty I suggest deleting it Chidgk1 (talk) 06:34, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Musical instruments played with drum sticks

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Why do these exist? They are not actual categories like Category:Hand drums or any of the Hornbostel-Sachs divisions. The latter is a duplicate of Category:Hand percussion. Why? I Ask (talk) 18:36, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. But I admit I do not understand nom's rationale. While Wikipedia rightly uses Hornbostel–Sachs extensively, we need not restrict ourselves to this scheme of categorisation, and nothing in Wikipedia:Categorization supports doing this. Nor do guidelines mention actual categories (or have I missed it?) whatever these are. On the other hand these categories each refer to a defining characteristic. At the very least, nom should clarify their rationale and relate it to the guidelines. Andrewa (talk) 21:15, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Note that Andrewa is the creator). To clarify using formal Wikipedia terms, none of these categories are defining per WP:DEFINING. In fact, to say a snare drum can be categorized by its beater is wrong. Sure, it is played with sticks, but also soft timpani mallets, brushes (a type of specialty beater), and rutes. Hell, see Swerve by Gene Koshinski. The snare is played with hands, a triangle beater, and a door stop, and it is among the more popular solos for the instrument. The implements used to play percussion are non-defining given the nature of the instrument family and can be confusing for readers. Bongos is a hand drum but it is also incredibly common to play with sticks. I could place nearly any percussion instrument into all three of the first categories and it would be, to a certain extent, correct. Thus, these categories are useless. Why? I Ask (talk) 22:17, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, it is no secret that I created this category. Nor is it relevant. I still get a !vote. Or do you see it as a COI?
    A snare drum is certainly played with beaters other than sticks... I regularly use rutes. But it can also be played using sticks, and most normally is. This distinguishes it from tympani and the conga for example. (In fact playing either of these with sticks risks damaging the head. I suppose it's no worse than a prepared piano but please don't try it.)
    So to say that to say a snare drum can be categorized by its beater is wrong is itself wrong, in my opinion. Andrewa (talk) 21:00, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The question of whether Category:Hand drums... is a duplicate of Category:Hand percussion (as nom seems to think) is a separate issue, but as the owner of several hand cymbals I have an opinion on this too. I thank nom for bringing it to my attention... some suspended cymbals are played and intended to be played by hand, for example my awesome Paiste Traditionals 11" thin splash (scroll down to it). So some work is needed on the hand cymbals redirect. Andrewa (talk) 21:28, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Films directed by

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per longstanding consensus, a filmmaker has to have a biographical article about them before getting a "Films directed by" category to batch their films under. None of these categories have corresponding articles and all consist of only one film. An effort was make to broaden the categories by searching for other works by these filmmakers, and none were found. Vegantics (talk) 18:31, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Saulkrasti

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only two articles in the category which are already interlinked directly. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Manosphere

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:COPSEP. Alternatively purge of individuals as Category:Men's rights activists exists. --woodensuperman 15:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Works about Yugoslav history

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, not a clear distinction versus its parent category, considering that Yugoslavia itself is meanwhile history. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Populated places in the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, not a defining characteristic, we do not usually categorize populated places by former country divisions, we do not have Category:Populated places in the Austrian Empire either. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:43, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aviation accidents and incidents caused by fighter aircraft shootdowns

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The category name is grammatically awkward, overlong, and overbroad. All incidents currently listed in the category involve airliners, creating a branch of Category:Aviation accidents and incidents that largely and needlessly duplicates Category:Airliner shootdown incidents. Such incidents should only be listed in one of these category trees. Additionally, the category potentially encompasses combat in war depending on the definition of "incidents"; this creates potential category overlap with Category:20th-century aircraft shootdown incidents and Category:21st-century aircraft shootdown incidents. (Relisting to seek clearer consensus; I CfD'd this category previously but drafted the nomination poorly and did not suggest a merger target.) Carguychris (talk) 14:20, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aloja, Latvia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, each of these categories only contains the eponymous article and a subcategory. The subcategory suffices. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:35, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Esports techniques

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: withdrawn. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:16, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This rename will make this category more broad, the Russian Wikipedia ironically already goes for more board scope as opposed to targeting esports specifically. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 23:43, 17 October 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) 02:56, 25 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.


October 24

[edit]

Category:Operations against organized crime

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with parent Category:Law enforcement operations. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:09, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Child pornography crackdowns

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Actual contents are mostly law enforcement operations. Those that aren't should be purged and relocated to other subcategories of Category:Child pornography. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:57, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Empires and kingdoms of foo

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These are not all "empires and kingdoms", but rather include all historical states which once inhabited the modern-day territory of these countries. Opting for "polities" rather than "states" to remove any ambiguity (and these were not all "countries" either). Category:Former political entities in Afghanistan (currently the lone country cat in Category:Former territorial entities in Asia) and Category:Former countries in Indian history already exist, and thus Category:Empires and kingdoms of Afghanistan and Category:Empires and kingdoms of India should be merged there, and the two parents renamed with the desired naming scheme. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 00:40, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In fact there is a Category:Italian states. I sympathize with the argument of anachronism, but merging to general history categories would result in these categories becoming very messy. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:40, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, I think that Category:Italian states does not pose a similar issue as it seems to be based on ethnicity and/or a link to a historical region, and thus is not anachronistic. To me, anachronism seems to be a significant issue in the case of the nominated categories, which needs to be addressed in one way or another. PadFoot (talk) 13:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure how to conclude that it is based on ethnicity or historical region. The category just lists all states within the boundaries of 21st-century Italy. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:21, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, See the category itself. It says in the top:

This category contains articles on former Italian countries and polities. This category contain all the former states south of the Alpine water divide (North Italy) and in the Italian Peninsula and all the states of Italian language and or culture.

Besides, what is important is that the nominated categories present issues of anachronism. Perhaps you could suggest a way to fix that? PadFoot (talk) 02:49, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Italian Peninsula may well be considered to be a region, but current North Italy isn't part of it. North Italy is included in the category just because it belongs to the current state of Italy. There is also Category:Former countries in Spanish history. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
North Italy is indeed a part of it. See the very first line of the article on Italian Peninsula:

is a peninsula extending from the southern Alps in the north to the central Mediterranean Sea in the south

Besides, the cat also mentions "states of Italian language and culture". However, you have convinced me that the categories should be retained and not merged, but should be renamed (in one way or another) to fix the anachronism. Perhaps, we should also expand in the categories. PadFoot (talk) 12:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the alternative name suggested by PadFoot?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:45, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Unassessed vital articles

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: deleted out of process. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category Category:Unassessed vital articles is a project page! Also, I don't understand New Nominations, but I am pretty sure there aren't any. It is used for WikiProject Vital Articles, so why is it a canidate for speedy deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellow i am here (talk • contribs) 19:55, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The above comment was malformed and is now fixed. Speedy delete per C4. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:59, 24 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.

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge, as suggested by NL?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Apart from Byzantine abbots there isn't anything specifically medieval about abbots. Should we then also create a separate category for medieval Christian abbots, and for medieval Irish abbots? I don't think so, the century categories seem to suffice. Having said that, I have not nominated Category:Medieval abbots and it's probably too late to add this now. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:10, 16 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) 19:23, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pages using the JsonConfig extension

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. It is WP:SNOWing and because the category will continue to grow over the course of the week – making cleanup take longer – I am ending this one prematurely. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:51, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Pointless tracking category - will eventually include literally every articlepage with a citation. To implement this deletion, create MediaWIki:Jsonconfig-use-category with the text -. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:20, 24 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: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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Now that the premature emptying issue is resolved, do people support a merge to Category:Ukrainian Democratic Party (1904) politicians (as suggested by Mason)?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am not seeing anyone who supports the category's continued existence, so discussion on whether it should be deleted or merged is needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:00, 24 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]

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) 01:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To further emphasize, there is no such role as "second lady" in the Philippine context, so the question whether it is a defining characteristics for its member articles is moot. Being a spouse is a different thing and if the intent of the article is to cover vice president spouses then a rename should be in order.. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 01:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still need more participation to form consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 18:58, 24 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]

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) 00:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per Bearcat. Moreover, a season is not an event and all of the season articles should be removed, regardless of the result of this discussion.--User:Namiba 18:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Disagree. Those should remain. A season is a collection of events/games pbp 18:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your definition of a sports season as a singular event is contrary to widely established consensus on Wikipedia. A season includes far more than just "a collection of events/games." It involves obtaining players and much more. Moreover, the games themselves did not occur solely in one place. They occurred in dozens of stadiums.--User:Namiba 18:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Yankees' home games occurred in Yankee Stadium, so I don't see what the problem is. You make it as though NONE of a Yankees' season occurred in Yankee Stadium, which is incredibly ridiculous. And I don't care what consensus is, consensus can change. I don't have to goose-step to it pbp 12:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Bearcat and Mason. No one has presented a cogent argument why Yankee Stadium should be an exception from WP:OCVENUE. It's a stadium in NYC where NYC baseball teams have routinely hosted games. What's exceptional about that? Additionally, I agree with Namiba that's it's nonsensical to categorize an MLB team's season as if it took place entirely in one venue. Carguychris (talk) 19:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as with recent CfD's on event-by-venue categories: 1 & 2. It's a perfectly good defining characteristic. The cited clause of OCVENUE has no rational basis. Agree with removing the season articles though, per Namiba's comment that a season is not an event. Toohool (talk) 20:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Without the seasons, there are very few events in this category.--User:Namiba 20:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Added more articles to the category. Toohool (talk) 22:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The stated reason for discouraging categorizing events by venue is that the categories would become too large, per WP:OCVENUE. I'm unclear if the second paragraph of the editing guideline still has community consensus but, even amongst those that support the concept, I don't think category size is the the real concern. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As per Purplebackpack89 and RevelationDirect. Boxing matches are categorized by venue and I see no reason why a general category should also exist. Sam11333 (talk) 08:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note this category confuses two different stadiums, both of which are named Yankee Stadium. Most of the events in this category occurred in Yankee Stadium (1923), not the present stadium.--User:Namiba 13:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If kept, a category split certainly make sense. RevelationDirect (talk) 17:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair other venues have been rebuilt but have just one category for events. MGS and Wembley Stadium to name just two. Sam11333 (talk) 21:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid reason to keep a category.--User:Namiba 17:44, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus to delete the category, but if kept should it be purged of season categories?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:54, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It helps readers navigate between events that have been held at Yankee Stadium. Rlendog (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Geography of the Republic of Hawaii

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Not useful for navigation, and its current entries don't actually belong in the category, since they're about the current state of Hawaii. If we had articles particularly focusing on the Republic of Hawaii's geography (such as its administrative subdivisions) this might be useful... but we don't. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:43, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sherbrooke teams

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Small categories (just the article and a subcategory for players) which hinder navigation. Both are already in Category:Defunct ice hockey teams in Quebec. If anyone feels like doing a mass nomination, the vast majority of sub-categories here could probably be merged as well.--User:Namiba 15:13, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:21st-century diplomatic conferences (Afghanistan)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Nominating these subcats of the main 21st-century diplomatic conferences category. These subcats are WP:Overcat or in this case over subcat as each one of these subcats don't do much in terms of organizing these articles in a proper order nor are accurate.

For instance, the Afghanistan subcat deals in regard to the War in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021. But the G7 articles under the Global subcat also dealt with Afghanistan including other conflicts. The G7 summit in 2013 for instance dealt with the war in Syria as one of the agenda items. So if there was a subcat with (Syria) in the title, it would go in there as well by this logic of the now-banned creator. But it too would go in the Global category. So, it would be too many categories for each summit that overlap on issues they deal with.

If there are going to subcats for the main category, it should be probably be something like "Category:2024 diplomatic conferences" as by year would help reduce the overflow of articles in one category. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:41, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Brunel University London

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The university has changed name after joining the University of London, see Brunel University of London. Elshad (talk) 09:26, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:History of Landskrona by topic

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only four subcategories, and after the merge the target will only have 6 entries. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:14, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Centuries in Landskrona

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pacific Ocean theatre of World War II

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Main article uses this spelling variant. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:09, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the countries most obvious in this area are english variant spelling locations (it wasnt simply the US presence that were components of the action) suggest that both the article and category are given the credit of the non-us spelling JarrahTree 05:50, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 23

[edit]

Category:Political parties of minorities in China

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. The category description is vaguely worded (simply "minorities") and is left to the interpretation of editors. The immediate policy-based issue is WP:CATV; the creator of the category has been adding it to articles seemingly based on their own interpretations of the category they created. No additional sources or context has ever been provided by them.
The problem with verifiability becomes particularly troublesome when the creator's definition of "minority" seems to be far from any reliable sources'. For example, the category's creator has been adding it to several Hong Kong and Macau articles without further explanation, but both SARs / cities have Han Chinese minorities. While Cantonese speakers are a minority in the whole of China, they are not in those SARS / cities, and so their political parties, exclusive to the SARs' boundaries and not present in the rest of China, are not representative of "minorities in China".
There are also foreign organisations in the category that do not have any activities in China but claim to represent a minority in China, as well as organisations that have not been called political parties by the sources given.
I believe the creator's intention was to group political organisations of ethnic, cultural, religious or linguistic minorities in China together in one category, but due to 1. The vague wording and 2. Self-coinage, it has been open up to various interpretations that do not align with existing sources, including the creator's.
Similar categories made should be specific to the minority, e.g. "Tibetan political parties [in China]". However, this poorly scoped out category should not be kept. Yue🌙 22:59, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Lubāna

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:01, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Durbe

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:59, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Brocēni

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:58, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Ape, Latvia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:56, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:De Nora

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERCAT Only an eponymous article and the founder. Gjs238 (talk) 00:14, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 22

[edit]

Category:English-language news websites without paywall

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Whether a news outlet is behind a paywall or not is WP:NONDEFINING. Paywalls can be region-locked, can allow X number of articles before the gate shuts, and so on. It is too arbitrary and capricious to be used in this way. Zaathras (talk) 21:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete And having a payewall is more defining than not having one. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:37, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Baseball pitching

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename per WP:C2C; opposed at speedy a reason I didn't really understand. matches sister category Category:Batting (baseball). Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:57, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Professional wrestling games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This current name is too vague because this category doesn't seem to contain any other type of game. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Counter-Earths

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Rename due to none of the articles actually being about a fictional Counter-Earth and only consisting of fictional works. Should become a subcategory of Category:Works by setting with most others removed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This would be appropriate for most of the entries, which are titles of fictional works, but the main article, Counter-Earth, refers to the hypothetical body, while Gor and Paira (planet) refer to fictional versions of that body. Instead of a category, perhaps it would be better to list these works in a special section of the article Counter-Earth. This would be analogous to Fifth planet (hypothetical)#Fifth planet in fiction and Claimed moons of Earth#Literature. Goustien (talk) 04:49, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:10000000 (number)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only page is a redirect, individual category seems useless Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 16:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:First Timers bands

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCVENUE. We do not categorize bands for each individual festival or venue they may have played at, and First Timers is not such a highly meganotable special case as to warrant a special exception over and above other festivals. Bearcat (talk) 15:38, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Its function is different to most festivals though, as each band is playing for the first time there, so if they then become notable enough their having started out there is more distinct than a band playing at another festival at some point in their career. There are plenty of categories on here for bands who have released on specific record labels, and I see this as more in line with that. Lewishhh (talk) 15:46, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Agriculture in Saint Kitts and Nevis

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category contains only a redirect and an article about a historic cotton and sugar plantation that closed in the 1970s. Not helpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:54, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we're talking about categorisation of a single page, wouldn't it be easier to simply add the categories directly instead of an "Alt partial merge to different parents"? Obviously with a nomination for merging this specific category it didn't make sense to propose a merge of a category containing a former plantation to the four categories you've identified. AusLondonder (talk) 13:15, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where different members should go into different parents, please ask for "manual merge" or "partial merge", either with details or "to parents as appropriate". Your nomination would have put both pages into one target and this could easily have been passed to a bot to process, overlooking the loss of valid members from the other parent hierarchies. – Fayenatic London 15:24, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Female models from Allentown, Pennsylvania

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with two entries, over-categorisation by occupation and location. Merge to relevant parents. AusLondonder (talk) 11:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Isiro

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 11:16, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Ivangorod

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 11:10, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Volosovo

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 11:09, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rescue of Roma during the Romani genocide

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, one article each, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (creator). I hoped this would be populated by others since its creation, but no luck :( I agree this is currently underpopulated and there are no interwikis. I don't know any editor who is interested in and knowledgeable about this to populate this or comment on potential on this except User:Buidhe, perhaps. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:56, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Romani history by country

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer Mason (talk) 03:05, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pacific theatre of World War II US people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: parent is American people of World War II, and norm is not "US people" Mason (talk) 02:51, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:East Toowoomba, Queensland

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To match renamed article East Toowoomba. AusLondonder (talk) 01:10, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This could be speedied. Mason (talk) 02:51, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No as the article was renamed without a RM, it would likely have been opposed at CFDS. AusLondonder (talk) 08:44, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Suburbs of Maryborough

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing only one article, would be better categorised within parent Category:Maryborough, Queensland. AusLondonder (talk) 00:55, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Gaza envelope

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: More accurate and similar to the main article for the category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cactinites (talk • contribs)


October 21

[edit]

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]
Merge to Category:Pitcairn Islands criminals and Category:Sex offenders from British Overseas Territories. Pitcairn Islands the least populous territory in the world, with only 35 people as of the latest census. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Different suggestions; which one should we go with?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:34, 21 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]

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) 23:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonnym: thoughts on downmerging, as suggested by Marcocapelle? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping. Yeah, I'm fine with that suggestion. Gonnym (talk) 08:15, 22 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]

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) 23:27, 21 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I do not see Marcocapelle's comment as an objection to the split – if you (Marcocapelle or just a random passerby) object please say so :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shanghai Nobel laureates

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between city and award. Similar situation occurred with Category:Nobel laureates affiliated with Missouri Mason (talk) 23:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Category:Washington Redskins currentteam parameter articles

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Superseded by Category:Washington Commanders currentteam parameter articles, the current name of the team. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as redirect. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:24, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Was not tagged; I will do that.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Category:Washington Football Team currentteam parameter articles

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Superseded by Category:Washington Commanders currentteam parameter articles, the current name of the team. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a redirect. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:24, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There should never be any further use of this since the team was renamed. There are no other categories for old NFL team names either. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 23:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Was not tagged; I will do so. Thoughts on the suggestion to keep a redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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]

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 we should be set for deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NCAA Division I men's basketball tournament Final Four venues

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE. This is a clear example of sorting a venue by an event it hosted. User:Namiba 22:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets basketball venues

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: A small category which does not help navigation. All articles are already in basketball venues category so a dual merge is not needed. User:Namiba 22:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:God in art

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category appears to be specific to the Christian god, but God is about the general concept, the article about the specific deity is at God in Christianity. Category:Christian god (or Category:Christian God?) might be better titles than my first suggestion, I'm not sure, but I do think specificity is needed. Other parts of the category tree might need to be looked at if consensus is to rename this one (e.g. it has parents Category:God in culture but Category:Gods in art). Thryduulf (talk) 22:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Film production companies of Turkmenistan

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing only a single redirect. Serves no navigational purpose. AusLondonder (talk) 16:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Groganville, Queensland

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing only a main article about a locality with no population and a mine. Better categorised in the parent. AusLondonder (talk) 15:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Areas of Boston, England

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with title of article on the town PamD 15:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of people by honor or award

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To match parent Category:Honour and main article. AusLondonder (talk) 14:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to Cape Verde

[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) 14:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Wembley

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Previous consensus at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 11#People from London by locality and occupation was that this sub-categorisation is unnecessary and unhelpful. See also WP:OCLOCATION. AusLondonder (talk) 14:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Muswellbrook, New South Wales

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To match parent category Category:Muswellbrook and renamed main article Muswellbrook. AusLondonder (talk) 14:04, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nineveh

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is not a people category per WP:COPSEP. Subcat can then be added to Category:Archaeologists by region of study. --woodensuperman 12:56, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Albury, New South Wales

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Rename to match the main article Albury. While there are a number of very small towns and villages of the same name, none of these have categories and several of them have less than 100 residents. Albury is the overwhelmingly clear primary topic. AusLondonder (talk) 12:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ardglen, New South Wales

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a main article and an article about a tunnel in the area, would be more suitably categorised in parent category. AusLondonder (talk) 12:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Greenethorpe, New South Wales

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a main article and an article about a historic homestead. Would be more helpful contained within the parent category. AusLondonder (talk) 12:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Privolzhsk

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Gaginsky District

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Mezhgorye, Republic of Bashkortostan

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Capital University of Medical Sciences

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer Mason (talk) 12:08, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:GMA Network personalities

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: "Personalities" is redundant with people. There is no reason to have this category which implies to cover "actors and singers" when "people" apply just fine. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 09:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:ABS-CBN personalities

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: "Personalities" is redundant with people. There is no reason to have this category which implies to cover "actors and singers" when "people" apply just fine. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 09:05, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fiction about sexuality

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: It was speedy renamed without discussion. Some articles are about Sexuality in fiction but they are not technically Fiction about sexuality. So my proposal is to include both cases, as the scope of this was never discussed officially (or did anyone talk about it anywhere?). Web-julio (talk) 06:08, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. "selective split". about the page historial, any process you think is the best Web-julio (talk) 17:35, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:LGBTQ and religion

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: No one in the last discussion considered consistency with the main article (Religion and LGBTQ people).

"LGBTQ" comes first following consistency with family tree, but that can change, observing this discussion. Web-julio (talk) 04:05, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 20

[edit]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Surnames of Malagasy origin

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These two categories seem to be duplicates as they contain many of the same articles. I don't care which one is Merged into which but I think we only need one category for Malagasy surnames. They also aren't very well populated but that's another matter. Liz Read! Talk! 20:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Piedmontese-speaking people by occupation

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Redundant category layer Mason (talk) 20:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Historic buildings and structures in France

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OVERLAPCAT & WP:SUBJECTIVECAT)
The official heritage register in France is the Monument historique and all that this category contains is the Category:Monuments historiques of France subcategory so there's no navigational benefit to this empty parent category. And, if a Wikipedia editor added any articles directly to this category, it wouldn't be encyclopedic since it's so subjective. - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Background: We previously deleted similar subjective "historic" building categories here, here, here and here. Also, I moved two loose articles (1, 2) to the Mh subcat prior to this nomination.- RevelationDirect (talk) 18:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The problem here is that Category:Monuments historiques of France must be subcategorized under the parent category Category:Historic buildings and structures, where the naming convention established by sibling categories for other countries requires the form "Historic buildings and structures in [Country]". The rule here isn't that things have to be categorized according to the "official name" of the register that conferred historic status; it's that the tree has to be internally consistent within itself, so that the location of any related category can be rationally predicted by any user regardless of their depth or lack of inside knowledge of the "official name" of anything. So we can't just file Category:Monuments historiques of France directly in the parent category, because it's out of phase with all of its siblings, but we can't just exclude it from a parent category that it needs to be in either, so this category must exist so that France has a category named the same way as its other-country siblings are named.
    There's absolutely nothing subjective about them, either, as the categories were intended for buildings that have been designated as historic by external authorities, meaning that there's no subjectivity involved since the official registers of historic buildings tell us what does or doesn't belong in the categories. They're not categories for just any random building that any random Wikipedian wants to throw in them on the basis of a personal opinion that they're historic, they're categories for buildings that have been officially designated and listed as historic by the relevant authority, and thus have clear and straightforward and entirely unsubjective inclusion criteria. Bearcat (talk) 18:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Only 8 other countries still have a sibling category we haven't deleted yet because they often are used for any random building that any random Wikipedian wants to throw in them, if they're used at all. In contrast, the less subjective Category:Heritage registers by country tree has 55 countries in it including Category:Heritage registers in France. - RevelationDirect (talk) 20:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Category:Heritage registers by country is for things that are heritage registers, not things that are buildings on heritage registers, so that and this are not duplicating each other at all. And if the categories are being used wrong, then the appropriate solution is to clean up the bad entries, not to delete the categories altogether, because the categories do serve a valid and neutral and objective purpose quite independently of any misuse that may occur. Any category can have wrong stuff added to it at any time, so if "could be used wrongly" were a reason to delete categories in and of itself then we wouldn't have any categories at all anymore. Bearcat (talk) 21:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hatting myself; too many replies
  • We actually agree that the heritage register cats are conceptually different; my point wast that in practice they contain the same building subcategories. (As for the rest, I appreciate your differing perspectives!) - RevelationDirect (talk) 21:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Transgender

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The subcategories under Category:Transgender by country were recently renamed to Category:Transgender topics by country following this CfD. However, the top-level parent wasn't included in that nomination. Suggest renaming accordingly for consistency and to avoid the awkward adjective category title. Paul_012 (talk) 17:17, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:National artists of Thailand

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I previously raised objection to the decapitalisation of the category title at WT:CFD, though the reversion process seems to have fallen through the cracks. Anyway, as I mentioned in that discussion, the National Artist title is an award, and directly using the award title for the category does feel a bit unnatural. To compare, we don't refer to Academy Award "Best Actors", but "Best Actor winners". Renaming the category as proposed would better reflect the nature of the title, i.e. its being an award, not a job. Paul_012 (talk) 16:51, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I think the proposed form matches the general preference at CfD to follow the article title, though I personally dislike parenthesis in category titles when natural disambiguation is possible. So I'll also list Category:National Artist of Thailand awardees, Category:National Artist awardees of Thailand, Category:Thai National Artist awardees, and Category:Thailand National Artist awardees as alternative suggestions. --Paul_012 (talk) 16:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scindia dynasty of Gwalior

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary disambiguation. PadFoot (talk) 16:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Somali(an) people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename and re-parent, the country Somalia did not exist yet in these centuries and it is unclear whether Somalian would include or exclude current Somaliland. So I think it is better to re-parent these categories, i.e. move them from the tree of Category:Somalian people to the tree of Category:Ethnic Somali people. For example in the 13th-century category there is someone in the Maldives who was probably an ethnic Somali. Fwiw, many articles use "Somali" rather than "Somalian" too. This is follow-up on this earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lean Oppose. It may be a follow-up discussion, but that discussion didn't conclude that we should rename everything from a nationality( Somalian) to an ethnicity (Somali). Logistically, this rename would be incompatible with the templates its currently using. Mason (talk) 21:27, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. PadFoot (talk) 13:27, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Logos by country

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename to align with parent Category:Wikipedia images of logos and to avoid confusion with Category:Logos which contains articles rather than images. There are a few articles in these trees (not many), they should be moved to Category:Logos. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom Mason (talk) 21:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. If separate categories for articles and image files are desired, then this looks like the best way to accomplish that. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 10:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dynasties of the Rajputs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Simpler, more concise and more common construct. PadFoot (talk) 16:03, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Museum of the Year (UK) recipients

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Not a defining feature of any of the subjects. Not a particularly notable award. AusLondonder (talk) 14:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question: you say its not a particularly notable award, are there notability requirements for categories? The article itself Museum of the Year has 48 references. I'm not very familiar with the rules around categories but this seems like enough. John Cummings (talk) 18:07, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Categories use a somewhat different standard, WP:DEFINING, and most of the nominations here involve WP:OC. Hope that helps! RevelationDirect (talk) 22:57, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Carrathool

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing only the main article and an article about a disused bridge, better categorised in parent category. AusLondonder (talk) 13:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dumaresq, New South Wales

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing only the main article and an article about a defunct train station. Unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 13:45, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The main article is already categorised in Category:Towns in New England (New South Wales), a region largely overlapping with the Northern Tablelands. AusLondonder (talk) 15:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fiction set around Omicron Persei

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Every item in this category is a Futurama episode; it is also the only media which is frequently set there listed on the article Omicron Persei; this category may be too narrow or small. Xeroctic (talk) 13:38, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:LGBTQ centenarians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection under WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 12:49, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, trivial intersection. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:16, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep if Category:LGBTQ people by period subcats are defining, so is LGBTQ centenarians. EGRS doesn't say anything on that matter, yet people blindly use it imaginarily thinking it does. Or at least provide specific quote or section in which it applies.
    --MikutoH talk! 00:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    How is the intersection between being a longevist and LGBTQ defining? Your comparison doesn't make sense at all because LGBTQ people by period isn't relevant at all to the question at hand. Mason (talk) 01:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Per request @MikutoH
    >Do not create categories that intersect a particular topic (such as occupation, place of residence, or other such characteristics) with an ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or disability, unless that combination is 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. The mere fact that such people happen to exist is not a valid criterion for determining the legitimacy of a category.
    Mason (talk) 01:42, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:EGRS. I also believe that being a centenarian is non-defining for the vast majority of people but that is a different discussion.--User:Namiba

Category:People from Kamyenyets

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:45, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Zardab

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Sulam

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:38, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Athens, West Virginia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Anawalt, West Virginia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Lemington, Vermont

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:13, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Gazipaşa

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 08:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Thompson, North Dakota

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 04:47, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Kensington, New Hampshire

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 01:47, 20 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus to keep or merge the category, but I am not seeing objection to renaming if kept.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:47, 20 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]
@Vestrian24Bio: You only put the CFD tag on one of the categories. You are supposed to tag every category that is being considered for deletion. Also, I don't think we typically delete categories like these. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:28, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: All have now been tagged. Thoughts on the merits of the proposal / is it the case that we don't typically delete categories like these?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: These categories are automatically populated by the WikiProject template, so deleting them via CfD won't work; it'll only create red category links on talk pages. If the WikiProject standard is as you say, the incorrect assessments should be corrected first. However, I'm not seeing anything to that effect at the linked assessment page. It only says lists are excluded from Top and High class. The mention of cricket-related lists under Low class is only as an example, not a prescription. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Just noting that four of these categories are empty. Liz Read! Talk! 20:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Vestrian24Bio: I see that you manually emptied the nominated FL-class categories into Low-importance, e.g. [7]. If you're sure that you understood WP:CRICIS correctly, you'd have to do the same on the lists. The empty categories could then be deleted. I have no idea whether there is any feature in the meta template for project banners that would allow a quality class (List) to override an importance class that was explicitly specified e.g. as Mid, and force it to use Low instead. – Fayenatic London 15:48, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I see what you mean, I will raise this question at the Module talk:WikiProject banner and see if there's a way to suppress the importance assessment. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 16:08, 25 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]

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) 01:29, 20 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]

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]

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) 01:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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]

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) 01:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If articles and image files need to be separated then sure, go ahead. I don't know that they actually do, but if Marcocapelle insists then I'm willing to trust them. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 15:57, 20 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"