Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 24
July 24
[edit]Category:Pages using AM station data without facility ID
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#Category:Pages using AM station data without facility ID
Category:Pages using FM station data without facility ID
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#Category:Pages using FM station data without facility ID
Category:People with Asperger syndrome
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#Category:People with Asperger syndrome
Category:Sam & Cat
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:iCarly and Category:Victorious. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Sam & Cat to Category:ICarly
- Nominator's rationale: Only contains one article. Should also be merged to Category:Victorious. (Oinkers42) (talk) 18:14, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy merge per WP:C2F, presumably to all parent categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:41, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- I do not want it merged up to Category:Television duos, as that is for characters, and it is already present on Category:2010s Nickelodeon original programming. (Oinkers42) (talk) 21:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, that is fair. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:58, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- I do not want it merged up to Category:Television duos, as that is for characters, and it is already present on Category:2010s Nickelodeon original programming. (Oinkers42) (talk) 21:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Films produced by Thomas K. Gray
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:31, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization: This is a category for films directed by someone who has either never had or no longer has a Wikipedia article about them. It has only one entry for a film from 1993 and a search for additional articles that meet the criteria of this category turned up no results. I would not oppose this category being re-created in the future if Gray produces additional films, but at the present moment this is unhelpful for navigating Wikipedia Vegantics (talk) 17:52, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:42, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Cochise County conflict
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#Category:Cochise County conflict
Category:American folklore
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: split. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose splitting Category:American folklore to Category:American folklore and Category:People from American folklore
- Nominator's rationale: Per WP:COPSEP, this should be split into a people and non-people category. --woodensuperman 12:14, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just purge biographies, "folklore" is not a defining characteristic of them. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Split per nom, & purge the bios of most actual historical figures - William Kidd etc. Johnbod (talk) 17:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Leaning split and purge bios to the Category:People from American folklore. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:00, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support – You can just go ahead and make that subcategory. Some of the bios may need purging but I don't agree that there shouldn't be any real people in the category. People like Jesse James are significant figures in American folklore. Folklore is not just fictional stories. MClay1 (talk) 16:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Family of Boris Johnson
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: keep. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:29, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Family of Boris Johnson to Category:Boris Johnson family
- Nominator's rationale: Reverse speedy name change. It was an error on my part; I didn't realize that the original version was the correct form. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Rename per nom, see Category:Family by person.Marcocapelle (talk) 04:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wait, for some reason I had in mind to rename to Category:Family of Boris Johnson instead of from. Most siblings use "Family of" so I am not sure why it would be more correct to have family at the end. More explanation is needed. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose; most subcats of Category:Family by person follow the existing style. "[Surname] family" and "Family of [full name]" seems to be the general rule. Ham II (talk) 19:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Ham II, @Marcocapelle - it matches categories in Category:Political families of the United Kingdom and Category:Families of prime ministers of the United Kingdom. Not to mention that it is also the format for Category:First families of the United States. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:15, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Ultimately I think either way is fine, but apparently we need an option A versus an option B here in order to achieve consistency. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:18, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Most of the comparable categories in Category:Political families of the United Kingdom have only surnames; the only ones with individuals' names are this one and Category:Family of Sir Henry Norman, 1st Baronet. There are articles titled Family of David Cameron and Family of Winston Churchill in politics (as well as Family of Joe Biden, Family of Donald Trump and Family of Barack Obama). In Category:First families of the United States, "[Surname] family" isn't used for Category:Family of Bill and Hillary Clinton. Ham II (talk) 06:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Ham II, @Marcocapelle - it matches categories in Category:Political families of the United Kingdom and Category:Families of prime ministers of the United Kingdom. Not to mention that it is also the format for Category:First families of the United States. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:15, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)- @Marcocapelle, I would say that the name, for now, should be made consistant with all the other categories and then a later Cfd can be opened with an A and B option for categories like this. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with the principle of discussing the A and B options; would that be an RfC or can CfDs present two possibilities like that? I've found many more categories to add to Category:Families by person (which has been speedily renamed since earlier in this conversation), and the picture now looks very mixed. Ham II (talk) 19:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Marcocapelle, I would say that the name, for now, should be made consistant with all the other categories and then a later Cfd can be opened with an A and B option for categories like this. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:31, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. If it is the family of a single notable individual, it should be in the form Family of [person], but if it is the whole family being discussed, is should be [Surname] family. --woodensuperman 12:33, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as "Family of Boris Johnson" per above, on grammatical grounds & others. Johnbod (talk) 17:41, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose – Proposed name sounds awkward and current name is better. It only makes sense to use "X family" if it's just the surname. An ordinary person called John Smith would refer to his family as "the Smith family" and never "the John Smith family". MClay1 (talk) 04:12, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Works about villains
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: no consensus to delete , so rename to Category:Works featuring villain protagonists. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 14:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: This topic is really vague in the extreme, almost anything can be called a "villain" by someone or characterized as being "about" a villain if they feature heavily in the plot. It doesn't make sense as a category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:47, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:Works with villain protagonists. Looking at one of the articles, I think this is supposed to be about works with a villain as the protagonist, such as Soon I Will Be Invincible. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:05, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, Category:Works featuring villain protagonists, like the video game subcategory, Category:Video games featuring villain protagonists. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:Works with villain protagonists. Looking at one of the articles, I think this is supposed to be about works with a villain as the protagonist, such as Soon I Will Be Invincible. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:05, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- If kept, rename. That clarification is really needed. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I do not support renaming, as I think the renamed category suffers from the same problem, as does the existing VG category. I could easily call Nathan Drake a "villain protagonist", after all he does kill hundreds in his archaeology escapades. The "Fictional heroes" and "Fictional villains" categories were made recently, one by a disruptive editor, and are also subjective. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:54, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete but add Category:Video games featuring villain protagonists up into Fictional villains for now. The film subcat is already within that parent hierarchy via Supervillains. – Fayenatic London 17:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- The merge target must now be Category:Villains after Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 8#Category:Fictional villains. – Fayenatic London 07:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Meanwhile I am leaning more towards Fayenatic london's solution. One subcategory does not clearly belong here, the next is already in the tree of Category:Villains and the third can be added there. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:38, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:Works featuring villain protagonists. That is a useful categorisation of works. I disagree with the comment that a character being a villain is subjective – the real-world morality of how many people a character kills is irrelevent; the character is defined as a hero or villain within the context of the story or otherwise reliably sourced analysis in the article. MClay1 (talk) 01:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Dobrujan Tatar
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 9#Category:Dobrujan Tatar
Category:People from the Savoyard state
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 14:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:People from the Savoyard state to Category:People from Savoy
- Nominator's rationale: Overlapping category Mason (talk) 23:21, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Smasongarrison: not very overlapping, there is quite a difference between the duchy of Savoy in the Holy Roman Empire, the "extended" Savoyard State which largely consisted of current Piedmont in Italy, and two French departments with Savoie in their name, Savoie and Haute Savoie. The category tree is quite messy but this is not the way to solve it. Perhaps a better alternative is to convert Category:People from Savoy to a disambiguation page. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hmmm. I worry that making People from Savoy a disambiguation page might make it even messier. So would the FOOian century people from Savoy catergies need to be rearranged as well. I'm open to alternative solutions that tidy up this mess. Is Savoyard State really the term we should be using at all? Because it seems not be a nationality from my skimming of the category.Mason (talk) 19:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Agree that the centuries need to be renamed. It is a composite state, comparable to the Crown of Aragon and the United Kingdom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hmmm. I worry that making People from Savoy a disambiguation page might make it even messier. So would the FOOian century people from Savoy catergies need to be rearranged as well. I'm open to alternative solutions that tidy up this mess. Is Savoyard State really the term we should be using at all? Because it seems not be a nationality from my skimming of the category.Mason (talk) 19:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 10:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)- @Smasongarrison and Marcocapelle: Any compromise here? HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:29, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think that Marcocapelle has really excellent and thoughtful points. I think that the current names and the entire tree is a mess. No consensus? I would love for a solution but I think we'd really need to taken the full tree. Mason (talk) 03:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Technology articles with topics of unclear notability
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose deleting Category:Technology articles with topics of unclear notability (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Propose deleting Category:Broadcast articles with topics of unclear notability (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Propose deleting Category:Institution articles with topics of unclear notability (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Propose deleting Category:Media articles with topics of unclear notability (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Propose deleting Category:Science articles with topics of unclear notability (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Propose deleting Category:Unknown topic articles of unclear notability (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Nominator's rationale: Unclear if these are needed as they aren't listed as one of the valid categories in {{Notability}}. Gonnym (talk) 08:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Not used by Template:Notability, according to source code. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:04, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Bombing of the Gaza Strip
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Airstrikes during the Israel–Hamas war. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 14:25, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: This category has a lot of overlap with the parent category. I think a better name would be Category:Israeli airstrikes during the Israel–Hamas war, which more closely mirrors sibling categories like Category:American airstrikes during the Syrian civil war Mason (talk) 04:10, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Rename per nom or merge to Category:Airstrikes during the Israel–Hamas war. Renaming and moving articles from Category:Airstrikes during the Israel–Hamas war to here would nearly empty Category:Airstrikes during the Israel–Hamas war so merging is also a good option. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:49, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge to Category:Airstrikes during the Israel–Hamas war per Marco. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:27, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm also fine with the proposed merge target. Mason (talk) 23:20, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge to Category:Airstrikes during the Israel–Hamas war per Marco. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:27, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:3-honeycombs by order
[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/merge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 14:26, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose deleting Category:3-honeycombs by order (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Propose merging Category:Order-3-n 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-4-n 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-5-n 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-6-n 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-7-n 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-8-n 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-n-2 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-n-3 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-n-4 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-n-5 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-n-6 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-n-7 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Propose merging Category:Order-n-8 3-honeycombs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:3-honeycombs
- Nominator's rationale: Mostly redirects with few unique articles. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:04, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge per nom and purge redirects to the same articles that are already in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:52, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:American veterans activists
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#Category:American veterans activists
Category:Bedouin businesspeople
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). Qwerfjkltalk 14:30, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Bedouin businesspeople to Category:Arab businesspeople
- Nominator's rationale: Not necessary to subcategorize the target category this way. Also contains only 2 articles. Gjs238 (talk) 17:41, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just delete, the articles are already in Category:Egyptian businesspeople and Category:Syrian businesspeople, which should suffice. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Marco. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Isn't there some benefit to categorising by ethnicity and nationality? Anecdotally, every Bedouin I've ever met would say that they're a Bedouin first and their nationality second. – Joe (talk) 06:38, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- merge I will nominate Category:Arab businesspeople shortly because it conflates ethnicity and nationality, like so many similar categories that have been brought to CfD. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Does it conflate them or just set up a parallel scheme for ethnicity, i.e. Category:Businesspeople by ethnicity? Do you also object to Category:African-American businesspeople and Category:Jewish businesspeople? – Joe (talk) 06:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Category:Jewish businesspeople is a recreation of a previously deleted category, so it is at least controversial. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- But it exists now. And Nyttend recently declined a CSD nom with this enlightening edit summary:
We're no longer in the same situation as before — the recent "keep" for Jews by occupation (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 26) means that there's recent support for categories of this type, and speedy-deleting just this one would be absurd
. I don't have a dog in this fight, but wouldn't it make sense to establish a consensus for or against categories by ethnicity, rather than seeking to delete individual ones here and there? – Joe (talk) 11:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- But it exists now. And Nyttend recently declined a CSD nom with this enlightening edit summary:
- Category:Jewish businesspeople is a recreation of a previously deleted category, so it is at least controversial. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Does it conflate them or just set up a parallel scheme for ethnicity, i.e. Category:Businesspeople by ethnicity? Do you also object to Category:African-American businesspeople and Category:Jewish businesspeople? – Joe (talk) 06:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retain I can list quite a few reasons for this: Bedouins have a distinct cultural, historical, and social identity within the Arab world. Merging their category into a general "Arab businesspeople" category could be seen as diluting the unique aspects of their cultural heritage. A specific category helps represent their unique challenges and contributions which might not be adequately covered. The Bedouin community has a history of nomadic trade and business practices that differ significantly from other Arab groups. A specific category preserves this historical context. Bedouins have distinct social structures and community dynamics that influence their business practices. Specific business strategies, success stories and challenges faced by Bedouin businesspeople can be studied with the help of a dedicated category. For cultural studies research, having a specific category can help in drawing more nuanced conclusions about the Bedouin way of life and their integration into modern economies. Furthermore, Wikipedia claims to be an inclusive platform representing diverse perspectives and communities. This category aligns with the principle of giving minority groups adequate representation. Merging the category marginalizes the Bedouin community within the larger Arab context.--Simxaraba (talk) 08:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- None of this addresses the small size of the category, and this is just WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- There are several more businessmen that are notable enough to be written about. Just because the category is small at the moment doesn't mean there aren't more. Simxaraba (talk) 15:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- None of this addresses the small size of the category, and this is just WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge? Delete? Keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:30, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge
- Category:Bedouins not subcategorized by occupation
- Category:Arab businesspeople not subcategorized by ethnic group
Gjs238 (talk) 10:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will note that the originally proposed merge target has been deleted following Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 7#Category:Arab businesspeople.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:26, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:4-polytope stubs
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Geometry stubs. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:21, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:4-polytope stubs to Category:Geometry stubs
- Nominator's rationale: A small 26-page stub category on a niche topic. Consider also checking if articles are directly in Category:4-polytopes. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Reginar Brussels
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). Qwerfjkltalk 14:30, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Procedural nomination of a category which was discussed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 16#History of Brussels by period but was never tagged; I have no opinion on whether this should happen or not. Pinging Marcocapelle. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:20, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per precedent. Apologies for the omission. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:57, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Palestinian bedouins
[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: Reverse merge * Pppery * it has begun... 16:01, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Palestinian bedouins to Category:Bedouins in the State of Palestine
- Nominator's rationale: Effectively redundant. Will require manual addition of parent categories to the target, for it is a downmerge. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Merge per nom, but purge Al-Hamra, Baysan which is about a village that was depopulated in 1948. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- What about Bedouins that originate in Palestine but now live in Israel (such as the Negev Bedouin) or Jordan? Category:Palestinian bedouins seems the broader category and therefore the better merge target. It also corresponds to an article, Palestinian Bedouin. – Joe (talk) 06:31, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Joe's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Negev Bedouin is in Category:Bedouins in Israel so I can't see this as a good argument against the rename. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- It should be in both, since the area was formerly part of Palestine. – Joe (talk) 08:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Joe's newer comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:14, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- The area was formerly part of Mandatory Palestine but that is completely irrelevant for this category. This is an odd argument too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:01, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- The relevance is that it that, because of this history, there are many (i.e. tens of thousands of) people who can be described as "Palestian bedouins" (I've given the example of the Negev bedouin; there are others) but don't reside in the State of Palestine. Your proposal is to erase this cross-border grouping (which is notable enough for a standalone article) and split it neatly into Category:Bedouins in Israel and Category:Bedouins in the State of Palestine, which does not reflect the messier reality. – Joe (talk) 13:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Category:Bedouins in Israel and Category:Bedouins in the State of Palestine are existing categories. They are not the result of my proposal. If you think there is something wrong with them (which I do not think) then you should nominate them for deletion, merger or renaming. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- You misunderstand. I think the current situation is fine. Merging Category:Palestinian bedouins id what would create a problem. – Joe (talk) 20:22, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is simply redundant considering that Category:Bedouins in Israel and Category:Bedouins in the State of Palestine completely cover the topic. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- You misunderstand. I think the current situation is fine. Merging Category:Palestinian bedouins id what would create a problem. – Joe (talk) 20:22, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Category:Bedouins in Israel and Category:Bedouins in the State of Palestine are existing categories. They are not the result of my proposal. If you think there is something wrong with them (which I do not think) then you should nominate them for deletion, merger or renaming. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- The relevance is that it that, because of this history, there are many (i.e. tens of thousands of) people who can be described as "Palestian bedouins" (I've given the example of the Negev bedouin; there are others) but don't reside in the State of Palestine. Your proposal is to erase this cross-border grouping (which is notable enough for a standalone article) and split it neatly into Category:Bedouins in Israel and Category:Bedouins in the State of Palestine, which does not reflect the messier reality. – Joe (talk) 13:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Reverse merge per Joe. I've tagged the target (pinging the creator Bohemian Baltimore). — Qwerfjkltalk 14:37, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Brainwashing theory proponents
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). Qwerfjkltalk 14:39, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Brainwashing theory proponents to Category:Mind control theorists
- Nominator's rationale: Whatever the difference is supposed to be between these two categories is beyond me. As far as I can tell, both categories are about people notable for writing works promoting the legitimacy of the sociological concept of brainwashing/mind control (which are more or less the same thing). This just seems like a slightly less neutral version of the other category made by a banned sock. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just delete, the articles are already in Category:Researchers of new religious movements and cults and that is exactly where they belong. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Marcocapelle I disagree with this, because brainwashing is actually a sociological debate, not strictly related to cults, that had quite a lot of scientific input. Like half the people in the mind control category have no relation to NRMs/cults at all. Brainwashing as a concept has been discussed in relation to politics, kidnapping (see Patty Hearst), etc. It is its own thing: while it is often brought up in relation to cults that's not its only relevance. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Possibly, but the articles in the nominated category are about researchers of new religious movements and cults. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Marcocapelle They're also primarily notable for brainwashing in a NRM context so I think it should be upmerged. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
The articles do not mention that they are a mind control theorist so I think you are applying WP:SYNTH.Marcocapelle (talk) 05:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)- @Marcocapelle Of the 7 people in the to-be-merged category,
- 1) Abgrall is noted as being a brainwashing theorist
- 2) Clark’s article is a stub that doesn’t say much of anything
- 3) Eichel’s article prominently mentions him presenting theories of brainwashing and mindcontrol
- 4) Hassan’s article prominently mentions his theories of mind control
- 5) Lalich’s article discusses her “coercive control” theories (also a synonym for mind control)
- 6) Langone discusses his theories of mind control/coercive control as it relates to cults
- 7) Singer’s article declares her notable primary for advancing theories of brainwashing
- At least 6 out of the 7 with the other being a stub without proper context.
- Mind control and brainwashing are the same thing (and our brainwashing page was at mind control until a few years ago) PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- I may have jumped to conclusions too quickly. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- lol don't worry it's fine PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- I may have jumped to conclusions too quickly. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Marcocapelle They're also primarily notable for brainwashing in a NRM context so I think it should be upmerged. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Possibly, but the articles in the nominated category are about researchers of new religious movements and cults. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Marcocapelle I disagree with this, because brainwashing is actually a sociological debate, not strictly related to cults, that had quite a lot of scientific input. Like half the people in the mind control category have no relation to NRMs/cults at all. Brainwashing as a concept has been discussed in relation to politics, kidnapping (see Patty Hearst), etc. It is its own thing: while it is often brought up in relation to cults that's not its only relevance. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same question: merge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:14, 24 July 2024 (UTC)- Lean delete, but only mildly. Mason (talk) 23:22, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- They aren't in the other category. I would rather not have to add them to it manually after the fact. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:07, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Lean delete, but only mildly. Mason (talk) 23:22, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Video games with expansion packs
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:20, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Last year, on May 7, 2023. A similar category "Video games with downloadable content" was deleted, and expansion packs are pretty much the same as downloadable content. In turn, this category is probably non-defining. Expansion packs are as common as DLC, and are essentially the same. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:28, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I'd agree with the nominator - having an expansion pack does not always modify the base game, so it's hard to call it a defining feature. Categories should be defining aspects of the subject, not something tangential. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose because there are several other potentially non defining categories like "Video games with alternate versions" that I would have put under discussion in the same nomination or whatever. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 21:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not a reason to oppose.
Just discuss with nominator whether the other categories should be included in this nomination or elseyou can nominate them separately, then you can support both nominations. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)- Striking half of my comment because I did not realize that the oppose was from nominator themselves. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not a reason to oppose.
- Oppose because there are several other potentially non defining categories like "Video games with alternate versions" that I would have put under discussion in the same nomination or whatever. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 21:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am going to note that nom is QuantumFoam66.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:13, 24 July 2024 (UTC)- Delete. The nominator's objection seems bizarre. They can just make a followup nom. Mason (talk) 04:12, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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.
Museum collections
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#Museum collections
Category:Kingdom Hearts original characters
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: merge Category:Kingdom Hearts characters to Category:Kingdom Hearts original characters. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:20, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Kingdom Hearts original characters to Category:Kingdom Hearts characters
- Nominator's rationale: Over 100 characters from various animated Disney movies, were removed from "Kingdom Hearts characters" about 1 or 2 years ago, also that category contains only 1 article. Also, we have to add an explanation to that category after the merge, since then it would only be for original characters. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 01:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Shouldn't it be a reverse merge, for clarification that it is about original characters only? Marcocapelle (talk) 04:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Reverse merge per Marcocapelle. If the category is intended to exclude non-original characters like the nominator says then keeping "original" in the title would better accomplish that notice of exclusion than any explanation in the category page that editors may not even see. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:29, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Reverse merge per Marcocapelle. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 12:53, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Reverse merge Per others, it makes more sense to specify it is only for characters created specifically for the series. That said, in order to preserve the history, the "original characters" category should be deleted first, and the older one moved to the new name. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Kingdom Hearts characters.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:03, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:1370 in Brussels
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#Category:1370 in Brussels
Category:19th-century feminists
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#Category:19th-century feminists
Category:Counts of Geneva
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:18, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: delete, the category consists of two very different sets of medieval ruling counts of Geneva, who are already in Category:House of Geneva and for early modern members of the House of Savoy for whom this was merely an empty title. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:22, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I don't believe the above summary to be quite right. Several members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county and they are not going to be recorded in 'house of Geneva'. There is also the house of Thoire that controlled the county briefly in the late medieval period who presently lack articles but would be members of the category if they didn't. Moreover even after the city of Geneva slipped from their grasp (they maintained control of other parts of the county such as Annecy) the county remained prominent among their titulary (several of the sons of the dukes of Nemours were called the prince de Genevois until the death of their fathers) and is featured in the leading sentences of many of the articles. sovietblobfish (talk) 08:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I do agree some form of re-allocation needs to happen from Jacques on down. Especially given the county was raised to a duchy by the duke of Savoy in 1564. Perhaps they should be migrated to a category called something like 'Prince de Genevois' or 'Prince of the Genevois'. sovietblobfish (talk) 08:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Of course members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county because it was part of the Savoyard state and the rulers of the latter were the ones enjoying practical control. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- At times yes, however the county (-1564 duchy) was under the authority of the cadet branch Savoie-Nemours for the majority of the 16th century and parts of the 17th century, and they were primarily French princes.
- Irrespective of whether they or the dukes of Savoy enjoyed practical control, this surely challenges the notion that it was an 'empty title' and it is therefore meaningful to keep it. sovietblobfish (talk) 12:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Of course members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county because it was part of the Savoyard state and the rulers of the latter were the ones enjoying practical control. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I do agree some form of re-allocation needs to happen from Jacques on down. Especially given the county was raised to a duchy by the duke of Savoy in 1564. Perhaps they should be migrated to a category called something like 'Prince de Genevois' or 'Prince of the Genevois'. sovietblobfish (talk) 08:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I don't believe the above summary to be quite right. Several members of the house of Savoy enjoyed practical control over the county and they are not going to be recorded in 'house of Geneva'. There is also the house of Thoire that controlled the county briefly in the late medieval period who presently lack articles but would be members of the category if they didn't. Moreover even after the city of Geneva slipped from their grasp (they maintained control of other parts of the county such as Annecy) the county remained prominent among their titulary (several of the sons of the dukes of Nemours were called the prince de Genevois until the death of their fathers) and is featured in the leading sentences of many of the articles. sovietblobfish (talk) 08:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Villains in mythology and legend
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 1#Category:Villains in mythology and legend
Category:Decades in the Colony of Virginia
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: keep and let Gonnym work their magic (this is the ping you requested). HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:16, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Decades in the Colony of Virginia to Category:Decades in Virginia
- Nominator's rationale: Redundant categoey lay Mason (talk) 03:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- It could be populated and turned into a subcategory of Category:Colony of Virginia. Most of all, parent Category:History of the Colony of Virginia is redundant. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose and add all relevant decade categories (1600s to 1770s). The Colony of Virginia and Virginia are not the same entity and should not be mixed up in the same category just because they have a similar them. The issue is with the year categories that aren't correctly named and thus the template {{YYY0s in one of the Thirteen Colonies}} isn't auto-populating these categories. Gonnym (talk) 15:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- See Category:Decades in the Massachusetts Bay Colony for how this should be correctly handled. Gonnym (talk) 15:09, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose and add all relevant decade categories (1600s to 1770s). The Colony of Virginia and Virginia are not the same entity and should not be mixed up in the same category just because they have a similar them. The issue is with the year categories that aren't correctly named and thus the template {{YYY0s in one of the Thirteen Colonies}} isn't auto-populating these categories. Gonnym (talk) 15:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Implement Gonnym's proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:52, 24 July 2024 (UTC)- Is @Gonnym willing to fix the template? Mason (talk) 04:16, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes that isn't an issue. Ping me if this closes with that result. Gonnym (talk) 06:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- If Gonnym or someone else is willing to fix the template, I'm fine with keeping the category. Mason (talk) 23:27, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes that isn't an issue. Ping me if this closes with that result. Gonnym (talk) 06:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Is @Gonnym willing to fix the template? Mason (talk) 04:16, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Irish blind musicians
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 1#Category:Irish blind musicians
Category:British companies established in 1706
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 03:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale:
Template:British companies established in the year only works for companies established after the creation of the Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707
* Pppery * it has begun... 00:20, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, the Kingdom of Great Britain started in 1707. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:09, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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:Biological literature by Janet Frost
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). Qwerfjkltalk 14:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Categories contain two non-notable dissertations that are going to soon be deleted. User who created these has been also indeffed for multiple reasons, including COI and hoax creation. Sgubaldo (talk) 00:03, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete the first two for sure. Categories that are going to be empty and won't be filled again? Get rid of 'em. The third could perhaps include categories that are actually populated, like Category:Works by Charles Darwin, Category:Works by Isaac Newton, etc. The name feels awkward, however. XOR'easter (talk) 00:31, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, the articles are already in Category:Biology papers, that should suffice. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This is an incomplete nomination. Two of the categories aren't even tagged with a CFD tag and Category:Biological literature by Janet Frost is an empty category. Sgubaldo can you tag all of the categories involved in this nomination? Liz Read! Talk! 22:05, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Liz, Category:Biological literature by Janet Frost is empty because the two articles that populated it have now been deleted. Apologies for the incomplete nomination, this was my first time at CfD. I've tagged the other two categories. Sgubaldo (talk) 22:28, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- No problem. Every deletion area on Wikipedia has its own rules and quirks. You won't find me at WP:TFD! Liz Read! Talk! 00:14, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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.