Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 27

< March 26
March 28 >

March 27

Category:Hungarian communities in Slovakia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Municipalities in Slovakia where Hungarian is an official language. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: At Category talk:Hungarian communities in Slovakia#Scope, Vipz, MirkoS18 and I discussed the issues with the current name, which I would summarise as WP:SUBJECTIVECAT, WP:ARBITRARYCAT, WP:NONDEFINING, and WP:UNDUE. We agree that the category should exist, but require a clearer, less arbitrary and more objective definition that gives due weight to significant Hungarian minority communities in Slovakia. In particular, we sought a fixed threshold which a Hungarian linguistic minority per fixed administrative division would have to meet in order to merit categorisation.
The Minority Language Law of Slovakia (officially Act on the Use of Languages of National Minorities, or Act No. 184/1999) seems to provide exactly that objective fixed threshold at 15% per municipality. It stipulates that municipalities where at least 15% of the population in two consecutive censuses speak the same minority language, have the right to use their minority language in official communications with local authorities, who are required to respond in that minority language. The Government of Slovakia publishes official lists of municipalities which have met this threshold, which gives us an objective, criteria-based, defining and due database to populate this category with. (It can also easily be verified with open source census data per WP:CALC, which I have already done for all municipalities with the status of "town" (mesto) at Hungarians in Slovakia#Towns with large Hungarian populations (2001–2021 census)).
Per WP:C2B, I propose to name this Municipalities in Slovakia where Hungarian is an official language, by analogy with the established naming conventions of List of countries and territories where English is an official language, List of countries and territories where German is an official language, List of countries and territories where French is an official language etc. Similar rename proposals are currently being done at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 20#Category:Countries and territories by language, and at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 25#Category:Hungarian-speaking territorial units in Croatia. (In Croatia, the legal threshold is 33%, and the govt also publishes official lists, but municipalities, villages/towns and settlements can voluntarily opt-in, unlike in Slovakia, where only census data determine local co-official minority language use).
I also propose to re-parent it from Category:Hungarian communities to Category:Regions of Europe with multiple official languages, where the aforementioned Category:Hungarian-speaking territorial units in Croatia is already in. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:02, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: In addition to Category:Regions of Europe with multiple official languages, we could also add it to Category:Hungarian-speaking countries and territories, just like Category:Hungarian-speaking territorial units in Croatia, but I suspect that the former will be the subject of another CfR if the latter (or its parent Category:Countries and territories by language, mentioned above) gets renamed, and I'd rather await that decision. But we could also tentatively add it, and perhaps retract it later if we change our minds. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:44, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, this is a good solution in a country where it is officially organized. That is perhaps not the case in every country though. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:08, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The official status makes a clear and objective category. - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:05, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — official status.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 03:29, 5 April 2023 (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:Heavy metal festivals in Estonia

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:Heavy metal festivals in Europe. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:45, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. Estopedist1 (talk) 21:55, 27 March 2023 (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:Fertilizer companies of Estonia

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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:44, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. Estopedist1 (talk) 21:30, 27 March 2023 (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:Pharmacy schools in Montenegro

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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:42, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. Estopedist1 (talk) 21:23, 27 March 2023 (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:TrueReal affiliates

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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:43, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:TrueReal affiliates (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Network ceased operations 3/27/2023 Mvcg66b3r (talk) 19:08, 27 March 2023 (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:American Roman Catholic Politicians

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. While there's agreement that the "by state" categories should also be nominated, that could be covered in a separate nomination. No real opposition to deleting this category by a banned user. bibliomaniac15 23:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:American Roman Catholic Politicians (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCEGRS. While having a Catholic president is a recognized subtopic in literature, simply being a politician is not. User:Namiba 18:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural comment, this nomination is pointless if the state subcategories are not nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:41, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete — not entirely pointless, this is a very recent shim cateogry containing only the by state sub-category. That should be deleted in the next pass.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 05:10, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • If in the next pass only Category:American Roman Catholic Politicians is nominated, without its subcategories, I will procedurally oppose. This one is less of a problem though, since it does not contain subcategories with articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:17, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • If not kept, merge to Category:American politicians and Category:American Roman Catholics by occupation, rather than delete. As long as there is content in the subcategory, it should be properly parented. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural Comment Neutral on removing a layer that's not used (so long as it's dual upmerged) but the reasoning seems to apply to the whole tree which is not nominated. I look forward to a substantive conversation with a later nomination, since this procedural discussion can't be a precedent. - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:01, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The 'by state' categories should be added. The whole tree is a recent creation by user:Fenetrejones who is now topic banned from categories altogether. (Politicians should be lower case, the subcats use 'catholic', there is no tree Category:Catholic politicians or Category:Roman Catholic politicians, hallmarks of someone who should not be allowed to create categories.) Oculi (talk) 17:18, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Namiba: you might just as well add the by state subcategories here. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:54, 30 March 2023 (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:Largest cities of Somalia templates

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Speedy merge under WP:C2F. – Fayenatic London 13:08, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Largest cities of Somalia templates (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: category consists of a single template. Should be up-merged to parent categories: Category:Largest cities of Africa templates and Category:Somalia templates. —⁠andrybak (talk) 18:03, 27 March 2023 (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:Asian sportspeople by region

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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:42, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Asian sportspeople by region (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    • Propose deleting Category:Southeast Asian sportspeople (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
      • Propose deleting Category:Southeast Asian sportspeople of Chinese descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    • Propose deleting Category:South Asian sportspeople (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Sportspeople by continent and nationality (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    • Propose deleting Category:Asian sportspeople by nationality (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Yet another regional sub-tree missed because it wasn't included in either of the parallel trees previously deleted.
Followup to:
  1. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 21#Category:Sportspeople by ethnic or national descent
  2. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 8#Category:Sportspeople of Asian descent
  3. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 15#Category:Asian sportspeople by ethnic or national origin
William Allen Simpson (talk) 17:28, 27 March 2023 (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:Time dilation

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename Timrollpickering (talk) 19:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Retain naming scheme of parent category, Category:Fiction about time travel. DonIago (talk) 17:12, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, there is no real-world content in this category level, and not enough articles in general to support a real-world category. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 03:31, 5 April 2023 (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:17th-century monarchs in North America

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete and upmerge. The first two categories will be deleted, and the last two will be upmerged. bibliomaniac15 23:38, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:17th-century monarchs in North America (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:17th-century monarchs in South America (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:18th-century monarchs in South America (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:18th-century rulers in North America (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:19th-century monarchs in South America (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale (17th-century monarchs in North America, 17th-century monarchs in South America, 18th-century monarchs in South America): Per precedent Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_7#Category:18th-century_monarchs_in_North_America: "viceroys" are not "monarchs", thus these cats can be deleted per WP:SMALLCAT because they will be empty. There is currently no consensus on whether continents are defining or WP:NONDEFINING for a monarch, especially if they reign(ed) over territories on multiple continents, in which case assigning continents to them may result in WP:ARBITRARYCATs or not. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:24, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale (18th-century rulers in North America): Similarly, this will be a WP:SMALLCAT because it will have just 2 items once Category:18th-century monarchs in North America has been fully deleted. In practice, we may decide to create a new Category:Miskito monarchs as a child out of Category:Miskito people as a new place to put these 2 items plus other ones labelled "king/hereditary chief of the Miskito kingdom/nation/reserve". Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:40, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale (19th-century monarchs in South America): Similarly, this will be a WP:SMALLCAT because it will have just 1 subcat (Category:Brazilian monarchs) and 1 item (James Harden-Hickey, a self-proclaimed unrecognised prince of 2 years on a tiny island in the South Atlantic) once the viceroys have been removed as non-monarchs. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:58, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove all vice-roys and consequently the first three categories will become empty and can be deleted. If the last two categories are not kept they should be merged to the parent categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:38, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's consensus that vice-roys are not monarchs so that takes care of most of the issues. Edward I (Moskito) and George I (Miskito) could be kept as the sole members of Category:18th-century rulers in North America but upmerging them to 18th-century North American people and 18th-century rulers is also a decent option. Likewise, I don't really have a preference about how we deal with Category:19th-century monarchs in South America. Pichpich (talk) 18:48, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Viceroys aside, weren't there monarchs in the Americas in the 19th century (such as in Brazil)? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 05:16, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is correct, they are in Category:19th-century monarchs in South America. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Please read "Nominator's rationale (19th-century monarchs in South America)" where I have specifically answered that question already. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:42, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: delete or upmerge the last two?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • (already voted) Of course this should be a merge instead of a deletion, there is no reason to remove e.g. the Brazilian emperors from the trees of Category:South American monarchs, Category:19th-century South American people or Category:19th-century monarchs. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:37, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As nom I'm okay with upmerging the last two; Red-tailed hawk and Marco have given good reasons for it, it's better than deleting them. (Note to self: I should make it a habit to check whether upmerging is better than deletion in SMALLCAT cases). Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 01:11, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Qwerfjkl I've answered your question over a month ago. Is there any other clarification that you need before closing? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:58, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nederlandse Leeuw, I'm taking a break from CfD closures, which is why I haven't closed this discussion or others. I plan to return and clear out the backlog completely within two months; I'm busy in real life currently. — Qwerfjkltalk 21:04, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh that's alright, sorry to bother you, take care. <3 Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:10, 2 May 2023 (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:18th-century presidents of the United States

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: Opposed - jc37 07:29, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT: there are only 2 items in this cat, and it will never grow, because there only ever were two POTUS in the 18th century. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is part of a wider categorization scheme. In particular, we want readers to be able to go from Category:19th-century presidents of the United States (or even Category:Presidents of the United States) to Category:18th-century presidents of the United States in one mouse click. There's currently a direct (blue) link to Category:18th-century presidents of the United States from Category:19th-century presidents of the United States (as well as from the 20th and 21st century categories). If we delete the former, those links will turn to gray, suggesting that there were no US presidents in the 18th century. The category is also a natural and important subcategory of Category:18th-century American politicians. Pichpich (talk) 18:30, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Many of these arguments could be used against any WP:SMALLCAT CfD. It may be argued that it is part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme. But so was, for example, Category:18th-century monarchs in North America (until it was deleted yesterday). And so are several closely related categories (see next nom below; so far most people agree that at least some of them should be deleted or merged, even if they aren't empty). Are we really going to need Category:19th-century monarchs in South America to exist, for example? I doubt it. It doesn't mean there were no Brazilian monarchs in the 19th century, but if Category:Brazilian monarchs is the only subcat, that's a little.... little. We don't need to have a nearly-empty cat just so that the number "19th" at the top doesn't turn grey and people will start thinking there were no monarchs in South America in the 19th century.
    Likewise, having List of presidents of the United States in its parent Category:Presidents of the United States (where both Adams and Washington have their own subcats), will always enable readers to find the first two. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 17:55, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I simply don't see how deleting this category serves the reader. Pichpich (talk) 21:25, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — sometimes, the oldest and newest categories in a tree will be more sparsely populated. The United States didn't begin on a convenient century boundary.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but this category does not have realistic potential for growth. You can always add more presidents at the front as long as U.S. voters and electors keep electing them, but the thing about the past is that you cannot add anything to it anymore. You may discover that certain events happened that weren't widely known, but you can't make new things happen in old times. I'm sorry that your country was founded in a categorisation-inconvenient time, but I'm afraid that we cannot accept any special pleading. To draw a fair comparison with my own country (or rather, one of its predecessor states), I think several categories within Category:History of the Batavian Republic by period may also not pass the WP:SMALLCAT test, such as Category:1795 disestablishments in the Batavian Republic‎ > Category:1795 disestablishments in the Dutch Empire > Category:1795 disestablishments in Dutch India, which contains only 1 item. Three completely useless cats that I'm ready to throw out like yesterday's newspaper, even though the Batavian Republic was founded and abolished in really categorisation-inconvenient times. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 18:07, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:51, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - perhaps 'part of a sequence' should be added to the WP:SMALLCAT 'unless' clause. Oculi (talk) 16:40, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I agree with Oculi. And I don't see a problem with small categories, they help in navigating articles. Dimadick (talk) 17:37, 2 April 2023 (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:1st-century BC monarchs in Europe

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. bibliomaniac15 23:15, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT: only 2 items. Although it is probably possible for this category to grow, we should also take into account Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_7#Category:18th-century_monarchs_in_North_America, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_19#Category:17th-century_monarchs_in_North_America and Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_16#Category:European_monarchs, where the viability of categorising monarchs by continent was or is actively being questioned as possibly WP:NONDEFINING and/or WP:ARBITRARYCAT. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:13, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Either keep and populate (there are numerous monarchs in Category:1st-century BC rulers in Europe) or merge to all parent categories. As the parent categories have not been nominated, they are a proper merge target. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:20, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and populate. This is a category that need not be small, and it makes sense to have. I oppose a merge to the parent categories. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 05:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The category has meanwhile been populated, so I guess the nomination is moot. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:14, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete — Abolish these WP:NONDEFINING continent categories. And the number is currently down to 2.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 02:50, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:50, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • It now contains 7 articles and many more may be added. So smallcat is really not the issue. Getting rid of the continent level (as anachronistic) is a valid point, but that requires nominating the whole BC people by continent tree. We can't single out one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough, SMALLCAT is no longer the issue. About continents, I'm not sure the correct approach is nominating the whole BC people by continent tree, because monarchs, by the very nature of their "occupation", could be reigning over territories in multiple continents that aren't unified states with a single "nationality", but rather a patchwork often held together by little more than a personal union. This makes monarchs different than other, say, "people by occupation and continent", in which "continent" might be a very legitimate parent of "by country" or "by nationality" categories (genuine transcontinental states excepted). But I suppose Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 25#Category:European monarchs is currently the best place to have that discussion, and that we can close this CfD here for now. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 01:03, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep How is being a monarch not a defining thing? How else would you get a page in the "1st-century BC book of notable people"? Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:31, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The continent is nondefining. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:06, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Absurd nomination. Dimadick (talk) 17:38, 2 April 2023 (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:Sportspeople by ethnic or national origin

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. – Fayenatic London 07:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Australian sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Belgian sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Brazilian sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Dutch sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Indonesian sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Italian sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Mexican sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:New Zealand sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Portuguese sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Spanish sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Swedish sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Swiss sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Thai sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Uruguayan sportspeople by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT parallel to Category:Sportspeople by ethnic or national descent. WP:COP-HERITAGE allows only descent or diaspora.
Summary: This recently created parallel category tree was also populated by the same continent and region decent subcategories. Continuing removals after categories were emptied by previous discussions.
Followup to:
William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Liz, Marcocapelle, Mzajac, Nederlandse Leeuw, and Place Clichy: Yes, these are all emptied. I'll do a separate nomination for the non-empty ones.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:01, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, trivial intersection between occupation and ancestors' nationality. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:15, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and precedents. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 01:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I came to say that most of these categories were empty but you know that already. Is there a reason not to just let these be deleted CSD C1? Liz Read! Talk! 02:33, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most will be deleted on your CSD C1 tag (I've not replaced them), the rest I'd beat you to them. These contained African and/or Asian subcategories. But many others were already deleted as empty during months of discussion that gradually depleted their content by continent or region (such as North American, Caribbean, Latin American, South American, Oceanian, European, Middle Eastern, and Caucasian). So this serves as a record of the discussion against future re-creation of similar categories.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 04:42, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a trivial intersection between occupation and origin. There are some cases in which this intersection is significant, e.g. the contribution of Polish footballers/miners in football clubs of Northern France at the peak of the coal industry is a known topic of research. However, these categories makes the link between origin and occupation systematic, and that's wrong. Place Clichy (talk) 07:39, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Strike my vote until the comment/question below is addressed. Place Clichy (talk) 08:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: most actual sportspeople-by-descent intersection categories have been removed from these categories as a group result of MonFrontieres's actions and the subsequent deletion of continental container categories. E.g. Category:Australian sportspeople of Chinese descent was previously in Category:Australian sportspeople and Category:Sportspeople of Chinese descent, and is now only in Category:Australian people of Chinese descent by occupation. So I guess we should either nominate the national descent categories for discussion, or re-parent them to the categories nominated above. @William Allen Simpson, Nederlandse Leeuw, Marcocapelle, and Liz: what do you think is the best option? Place Clichy (talk) 08:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm strongly opposed to triple and quadruple intersection categories. MonFrontieres made a complete hash of a previously well organized, poorly maintained system of categories. If kept, Category:Australian sportspeople of Chinese descent should be in Category:Australian sportspeople and Category:Sportspeople of Chinese descent. But that's not relevant to this nomination. These new "origin" overlapping shim containers need to be deleted, as they are against our explicit naming conventions. Future nominations are in the future.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 17:27, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that a triple intersection of e.g. 1° Australian 2° sportspeople of 3° Chinese descent is a problem, especially seen WP:OCEGRS. However there are currently 5 such categories for Australian sportspeople alone: Chinese (15 members), Indian (46), Pakistani (6), Samoan (167) and Tongan (150). All I'm saying is that we should either nominate these categories for discussion (in which case I would probably support deletion), or keep them properly categorized, in which case Category:Australian sportspeople by ethnic or national origin‎ is a natural parent and should probably be kept too. Place Clichy (talk) 17:55, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Looking forward to your nomination, and I'll be happy to second. Remember that there's the complication that "sportspeople" is an occupation, but then there are "sportspeople by occupation". It's another mess. I'm working on removing "national origin" at the moment. There's only so much time in my life.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Use of C1 during a CfD is technically not permitted, and will be reverted per complaint at WP:RFU. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:03, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
While you are technically correct, LaundryPizza03, most of these categories were never tagged as being part of this CFD discussion. Just being listed here doesn't make them subject to debate, the categories have to be tagged and the category creators notified and since they are not CFD tagged, and they are empty, they are eligible for CSD C1. Liz Read! Talk! 01:14, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea why the nominator failed to place a CFD tag on these categories as it is part of the written nomination process. Liz Read! Talk! 01:18, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • As was previously discussed (04:42, 28 March 2023), these were not tagged by me because Liz beat me to them. The others, I'd beat Liz. If our process requires two tags on a category, then that's news to me. I'd have added a second discussion tag. But there's no question that anybody watching the category was notified, as they were all tagged one way or the other. If our process is so broken that we need to re-tag and re-list these now empty categories for yet another week, that seems overly pedantic to me.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:14, 7 April 2023 (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:Non-German infantry divisions of the Waffen-SS

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: Procedural close. Duplicate concurrent discussions. (non-admin closure) William Allen Simpson (talk) 03:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Non-German infantry divisions of the Waffen-SS to Category:Foreign infantry divisions of the Waffen-SS
  • Propose renaming Category:Non-German units of the Waffen-SS to Category:Foreign units of the Waffen-SS
Nominator's rationale: According to WP:OCMISC, categories should not be called "non-..." (can't define something by something that it is not). So, the Non-German part of the categories' names should be renamed to something more proper: Foreign. Cukrakalnis (talk) 15:18, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcelus @RevelationDirect @Marcocapelle @Peacemaker67 @Place Clichy due to their involvement here, where Marcelus proposed to delete these categories entirely. Cukrakalnis (talk) 15:25, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural Close Since this nom isn't being withdrawn, it should be closed as a duplicate. (Category:Legions of the Waffen-SS can be reparented under Category:Military units and formations of the Waffen-SS for now.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 22:41, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What was wrong with the original categorization into volunteer and cnscript SS foreign units? You are proposing categorization for the sake of categorization. The previous system was much better. For example, the article 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician) was in the categories Category:Waffen-SS divisions (grouping all SS divisions in order), Category:Foreign volunteer units of the Waffen-SS and Category:Infantry divisions of the Waffen-SS. After your changes it is only in Category:Non-German infantry divisions of the Waffen-SS. Is this a better solution? In my opinion, no. All three removed categories were useful. Dividing foreign units into "legions," "divisions," "corps," etc., makes essentially no sense. Because foreign units in the Waffen-SS did not form a separate system, but were part of the Waffen-SS system.
So they should belong to a category that gathers them all (divided into volunteer and conscript, because that's significant in their case), and to a categories that would place them in the Waffen-SS system; so not "foreign divisions of Waffen-SS," but "divisions of Waffen-SS." Marcelus (talk) 22:44, 27 March 2023 (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.

North Carolina Central women's basketball

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename Timrollpickering (talk) 19:05, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Lady Eagles" is not the WP:COMMONNAME for the women's basketball team at NCCU per the team's site (last results come from 2019) and ESPN coverage. "North Carolina Central Lady Eagles" brings up ~500 Ghits. fuzzy510 (talk) 09:04, 27 March 2023 (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:Religious festivals in Zambia

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:Festivals in Zambia. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:57, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Looking at the articles that are currently in these categories, it seems that we have "several categories" for the same articles; I suggest we narrow it down to only one category. GeographicAccountant (talk) 07:25, 27 March 2023 (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.

Categories by date

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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:00, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with two subcategories each.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcocapelle (talk • contribs) 05:59, 27 March 2023 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_27&oldid=1157911543"