Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 22

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< February 21
February 23 >

February 22[edit]

Category:COVID-19 pandemic in Boston[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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:43, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NARROWCAT. Only two articles. User:Namiba 22:52, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:East German sailors[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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:43, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There's only one category in here, which is about the sport. There's no need to have this redudant layer. Mason (talk) 22:50, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Tongan women sailors[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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:43, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one person in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. If not merged, the category should be repurposed/parented to be Tongan sailors. Mason (talk) 22:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for now, without objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available. Marcocapelle (talk) 00:22, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:12th-century Danish sailors[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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:43, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's no need to have an underpopulated category for this occupation. The category creator has the habit of creating the category and then not populating it. (If kept, I think the category should be broadened to all 12th-century sailors) Mason (talk) 22:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just delete, the article is already in a subcategory of each of the targets. Marcocapelle (talk) 00:24, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Solomon Islands women poets[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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:43, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge for now. There's really not a large enough content to support this subcategory of Solomon Islands women writers Mason (talk) 22:15, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom, without objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available. Marcocapelle (talk) 00:26, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:L'Osservatore Romano[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 1#Category:L'Osservatore Romano

Category:Education in Yarmouth, Maine[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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:26, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NARROWCAT. Category contained two articles after the recent merge. One of them, which was uncited and about the town school district, has been redirected to Yarmouth,_Maine#Education. The remaining article is already in Category:Buildings and structures in Yarmouth, Maine and so this category can be deleted. User:Namiba 21:23, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Mali-Canada relations[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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:26, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: A Canada-Mali relations category already exists that follows the naming pattern for these types of cats. I moved the one category in this one to the correct one already (apologies if doing this incorrectly, first time) HighlandFacts (talk) 18:06, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:English triplets[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/delete as proposed. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:26, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article left in this category after implementation of this earlier discussion, which is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:18, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, but shouldn't it be merged to British triplets? Mason (talk) 03:51, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I have added Category:British triplets to the nomination because it would be emptied as a result of merging.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:34, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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


Category:Hebrew gods[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 16:31, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:49, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - mainly because Hebrew is a language, thus it is unclear what this means - all gods written about in Hebrew? But Marcoapelle, you know this and are also arguing for the deletion of Cat:Hebrews. As for the merge, you are trying to merge that at the moment so what happens if that succeeds? I note that El (deity) is is a term used in the Hebrew Bible. Israelites is relevant but as User:Dimadick in that deletion discussion, quoting Hebrews, ": "Historians mostly consider the Hebrews as synonymous with the Israelites, with the term "Hebrew" denoting an Israelite from the nomadic era that preceded the establishment of the united Kingdom of Israel. However, in some instances, the designation "Hebrews" may also be used historically in a wider sense, referring to the Phoenicians or other ancient civilizations, such as the Shasu on the eve of the Late Bronze Age collapse."" Doug Weller talk 14:46, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Philipsidae[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: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Typo for Phillipsiidae. —asparagusus (interaction) sprouts! 16:42, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Things named after Tolkien works[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) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I believe this is literally what WP:SHAREDNAME is for. --woodensuperman 16:27, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom but the subcategories should be nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:48, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Meanwhile they are being nominated further above on this page. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:53, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Noted, have included in above. --woodensuperman 16:51, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:IBM 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: delete. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:39, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unused stub template and category. As always, it's not helpful to have an endless profusion of virtually unused stub templates and categories specially dedicated to every possible topic under the sun, so stub categories aren't free for just any user to create on a whim -- there have to be at least 60 articles to use a template on before it can legitimately have its own dedicated category.
This template hasn't been applied to anything at all, however, so I have to presume that it was meant for IBM the computer company and not some other unrelated use of that initialism, but a quick scan of Category:IBM failed to find more than a tiny handful of articles that could legitimately be tagged as stubs -- and the very few I did find are all already tagged as {{compu-network-stub}} or something else that's already a subcategory of the only possible alternative place for this to upfile any entries to (i.e. Category:Computing stubs), meaning that this template would add nothing but unnecessary duplicate parent-and-child categorization.
Further, both the template and the category have actually been misspelled -- note both the capitalization of "Stubs" in the category and the non-capitalization of "bm" in the template name.
So the category isn't warranted if the template isn't already on 60 articles, and even the template isn't necessary at all if a dedicated category isn't viable. Bearcat (talk) 15:13, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom and the template should be deleted too. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:52, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Big League World Series Regions[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: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:40, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Region" should not be capitalized here. The categories holding the regions are not proper nouns. Creates consistency with Category:Little League baseball regions, Category:Little League World Series regions. No different than Category:FIFA confederations and other categories within Category:Continental sports governing bodies. –Aidan721 (talk) 14:47, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of speedy discussion
@Aidan721: Don't the category members indicate a proper noun? Also see Category:Intermediate League World Series Regions, Category:Senior League World Series Regions, etc. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 03:03, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's also Category:Little League World Series regions. The regions themselves may be proper nouns but the topic is most certainly not a proper noun. –Aidan721 (talk) 03:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did see that, and disagree the set cannot be a proper noun. CfD for r/R consistency then? Hyphenation Expert (talk) 03:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, these are regions (small r) of the Big League World Series. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Indian superhero films by decade[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 1#Indian superhero films by decade

Category:Category:American people by town and state or territory[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 29#Category:Category:American people by town and state or territory

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_February_22&oldid=1211253273"