Login
Login

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9

< December 8

December 10 >

= December 9 =

== Category:Among Us ==

: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) 16:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Among Us}}

:Nominator's rationale: No significant amount of articles and no existence of an article for Among Us (series). There are two subcategories, but theyre both marked as hidden and not for articles. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 22:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

::Oppose. This nom completely fails to understand the intended purpose of categorization. It isn't {{em|only}} intended for articles, but to group related {{em|pages}} together. This category has, as the nom mentioned, two sub-categories, only one is hidden, but being hidden isn't even relevant, and two articles. I also don't understand what the argument about "Among Us (series)" is. We don't only have categories if we have a franchise page. Deleting this category will result in all of these pages and categories being disconnected and any user wishing to navigate between these pages will now have an incredibly harder time. Gonnym (talk) 22:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

  • It would suffice to have the subcategories linking to each other directly, just like with songs and albums categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Gonnym explains it sufficiently. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 12:29, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete The amount of images is no more than any other 2 video game pages. If we had a precedent to have a category for every single grouping of 2 games just because they also had 4 images, we would have a category for most groups of video games ever. That is clearly not feasible, so there is no reason to keep the category around. Saying people will have a "harder time" finding the images when they are smack dab on the articles is also hard, if not impossible to believe. Nobody navigates to the categories first to find images. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:20, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete per Zx. There's just not enough here for a proper category, and its navigational purpose is moot. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete per Zx. There is no need for a category here and if we applied this standard we would have a category for nearly every game. Jontesta (talk) 13:38, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete A category simply isn't needed here. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:40, 11 December 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:Hotels in Columbia, Missouri ==

: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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Hotels in Columbia, Missouri to :Category:Buildings and structures in Columbia, Missouri and :Category:Hotels in Missouri

:Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization. Only one article. Can be merged with other buildings in the city, and other hotels in the state. Unknown Temptation (talk) 22:15, 9 December 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:Novels set in Columbia, Missouri ==

: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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Novels set in Columbia, Missouri to :Category:Columbia, Missouri in fiction and :Category:Novels set in Missouri

:Nominator's rationale: Only one article in this category (the "in fiction" category may be too small even combined, but that's another story). Stoner, while focused on the University of Missouri, is also set at various rural locales in the state, so we do not lose anything from categorizing it as a "Novel set in Missouri". Unknown Temptation (talk) 22:05, 9 December 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:Eastern Orthodox saints from Belarus ==

: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:Eastern Orthodox saints from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and populate. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:55, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Eastern Orthodox saints from Belarus to :Category:Belarusian saints

:Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now or reverse merge. WP:OVERLAPCAT. All 5 people have been canonized as saints in several Eastern Orthodox churches (and some in the Catholic Church as well), and they are all from the area now known as Belarus before Belarus existed. (Note: I moved some people born before 1240 to :Category:Christian saints from Kievan Rus' for chronological reasons; I did the same with Ukrainian and Russian saints earlier. These two Belarusian cats were barely populated to begin with.) NLeeuw (talk) 21:21, 9 December 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:1990 Goodwill Games venues ==

: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) 17:00, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|1990 Goodwill Games venues}}

:* Propose deleting {{lc|1998 Goodwill Games venues}}

:Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE and recent discussions. User:Namiba 18:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

  • Keep setting aside that OCVENUE isn't a policy, as far as I can tell, Olympics venues have categories that haven't been deleted and aren't up for deletion. If they survive, so should the Goodwill Games venues. "Per recent discussion" is also an underwhelming rationale unless the nominator mentions which specific discussions pbp 20:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

::The recent discussions: Olympic football venues,Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_25#Category:NCAA_Division_I_men's_lacrosse_tournament_venues, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_18#Category:2017_FIFA_U-17_World_Cup_venues, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_18#Category:2021_FIFA_Futsal_World_Cup_venues, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_18#Category:FA_Cup_final_venues, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_15#Category:World_Baseball_Classic_venues, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_15#Category:FIFA_World_Cup_stadiums, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_22#Category:Big_12_Championship_Game_venues.--User:Namiba 15:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete, not a defining characteristic of these venues. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete It's not clear to me there is a consensus to avoid catgorizing one-time events by a single venue. But the opposite, categorizing venues by many one-time events, is not defining and leads to category clutter. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:13, 10 December 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:Lamar Cardinals football venues ==

: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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:00, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Lamar Cardinals football venues to :Category:Lamar Cardinals and Lady Cardinals sports venues and :Category:College football venues in Texas

:Nominator's rationale: Contains just one article and 2 redirects. User:Namiba 18:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

::I created the subject category. Merging the subject category into the two categories noted in the proposal is acceptable to me. LUSportsFan (talk) 00:21, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

  • Merge for Now per WP:NARROWCAT. While these are defined by their regular use, we only have one actual article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:14, 10 December 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:Portal-Class Comics articles of NA-importance==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 21%23Category:Portal-Class Comics articles of NA-importance

==Category:1st century BC in Judea==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 17%23Category:1st century BC in Judea

== Category:English High School of Boston alumni ==

: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) 17:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:English High School of Boston alumni to :Category:The English High School alumni

:Nominator's rationale: The corresponding article for this category is titled The English High School. That article also says that it is "[c]ommonly referred to as Boston English." "English High School of Boston" should not be an option for the name of this category. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:27, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

:* Maybe not such a great idea after all. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  • Oppose renaming to :Category:The English High School alumni. Whatever the title of the article, it is likely that some users would be confused by that, thinking that it refers to high schools in England, or to some other school known as "The English High School", such as the one in Lynn, Massachusetts, or the one in Providence, Rhode Island, or the one in Nişantaşı, Turkey (now renamed). A far better idea is to rename the article on the school to make its identity clear, to something such as "The English High School, Boston". I don't like the idea of renaming it to "Boston English"; certainly that would not be desirable unless it can be shown that that is by a significant margin the commonest name used for the school, and even then I wouldn't support it, because to most people that would mean the variety of the English language spoken in Boston. JBW (talk) 13:30, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on JBW's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:53, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:33, 9 December 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.

== Ancient Hinduism ==

: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) 17:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting :Category:8th-century BC Hinduism (1 C)

:* Propose deleting :Category:7th-century BC Hinduism (1 C)

:* Propose deleting :Category:6th-century BC Hinduism (1 C)

:Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Merging is not necessary, the subcategories are already in e.g. :Category:8th-century BC people by religion. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 21:24, 9 December 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:Mythological Greek epic poets ==

: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. The counter-proposal to rename did not gain traction. No prejudice against manually creating a new :Category:mythological Greek poets if it can be appropriately populated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:06, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Mythological Greek epic poets to :Category:Fictional poets

:Nominator's rationale: merge, only two articles in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Skipping parent :Category:Fictional oral poets as a merge target because this has been nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:14, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

:* That is a fair point. Deletion is better indeed. The articles are already in :Category:Musicians in Greek mythology. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete Mythology should not be confused with fiction as there is not the same intent regarding truthful cosmological beliefs versus fiction made for entertainment. Jontesta (talk) 16:07, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Rename to "Category:Mythological Greek poets", and include other notable figures who would fit such a grouping, such as Orpheus and Musaeus of Athens. Being a poet is undoubtedly defining for each of these figures (more defining than being a mythological musician, except perhaps for Orpheus). Having a category covering legendary poets in Greek mythology seems entirely sensible. – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:10, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:* If more articles can be added after renaming then let's do that. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:21, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Should this category be renamed/repurposed? If so, can we add enough articles to it?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:15, 9 December 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:627 BC establishments ==

: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) 20:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:627 BC establishments to :Category:627 BC

:* Propose merging :Category:626 BC establishments to :Category:626 BC

:Nominator's rationale: merge, isolated single-article categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:39, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

:* Oppose putting Neo-Babylonian Empire into :Category:626 BC seems less helpful for navigation either from Category to article or vice versa. The connection between them is opaque. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnestorius (talk • contribs) 16:09, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

::* That is how it is done with other year establishments in these ancient times too. Hence these two categories are isolated. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

:::More useful and logical to upmerge to :Category:620s BC establishments. jnestorius(talk) 11:50, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

:::* Establishments categories by decade start after 400 BC and the two articles in the nominated category are already in an establishment category by century. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's most recent comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

:{{yo|Jnestorius}} Thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

::If {{tq|That is how it is done with other year establishments}} represents the result of a considered discussion then please link to that discussion. If it is just a de-facto standard that evolved without consideration then I suggest starting a full discussion rather than blindly conforming to a partial consistency. I say "partial" because e.g. :Category:620s BC deaths and :Category:600s BC births have plenty of one-article categories. Upmerging :Category:607 BC births and :Category:607 BC deaths to :Category:607 BC is unhelpful because you can't tell whether for a given article the category relates to the year the person was born or died (or perhaps some other important life event happened). I am making a similar argument for things other than humans. jnestorius(talk) 12:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

::* I don't understand what there is to discuss. Other stuff exists: for deaths and births there are different starting dates for year categories, so what. :Category:Earthquakes by year starts again in a completely different year and that applies to every other topic. This nomination is about establishments, not about births or deaths. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:08, 9 December 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:Fictional contortionists ==

: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: manual merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Fictional contortionists to :Category:Fictional circus performers

:Nominator's rationale: Too small a category to be merited, with only a couple characters as members. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:28, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:20, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

  • Support Too niche to be a clear and meaningful category. Merge it to something broader and clearer. Jontesta (talk) 19:30, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Still need a response to Marcocapelle's question: should the category be merged or deleted?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

  • If no other response, the merge should be done manually. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:15, 9 December 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:Alumni of Coleg Cambria ==

: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) 20:48, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Alumni of Coleg Cambria}}

:Nominator's rationale: Category containing no articles. :Category:Alumni of Yale College, Wrexham has been made a sub-category despite the fact that Yale College Wrexham is now defunct and the two alumni in the category graduated from it when it was not part of Coleg Cambria. This extra layer of categorisation is inaccurate and makes absolutely no sense. AusLondonder (talk) 19:44, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  • Comment There is now an article and a category (the one that you removed, AusLondonder) in this nominated category, so it is no longer an empty category. Liz Read! Talk! 06:44, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
  • :Yep that's why I took it to CSD instead of speedy. The article wasn't there at that point, though. AusLondonder (talk) 08:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep, since found things that can go in it, one article that attended when it became Coleg Cambria, and sub-cats to the predecessors. Do understand that before these edits the category was empty for years. DankJae 10:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: One article and a subcategory as of relisting; is that enough to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:10, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

  • I guess this is moot. There are now four articles in it. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:11, 9 December 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:People prosecuted under anti-homosexuality laws ==

: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) 20:51, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:People prosecuted under anti-homosexuality laws to :Category:People convicted under anti-homosexuality laws

:Nominator's rationale: rename (and purge if needed), we categorize by people by conviction, not by prosecution. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:40, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Conviction rather than prosecution is generally appropriate for crime-related categories, but here the broader scope is appropriate. Interest in the category is more likely to relate to identifying individuals who were persecuted rather than guilty. This is a subcategory of :Category:Victims of human rights abuses, and those victims include individuals who were prosecuted but not convicted on the basis of sexual orientation.--Trystan (talk) 15:39, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Trystan's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Trystan persuades me. See for example articles like Cairo 52, in which not all the victims of this human rights abuse were convicted but all faced the persecution of arrest and charges, or Dale Jennings (activist) who became historically noteworthy specifically because of being a famous and early case of an openly gay man successfully contesting charges under such laws. With the parent category :Category:Victims of human rights abuses, the scope of people prosecuted is valuable for navigation. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 12:38, 10 December 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:Indian Paintbrush (company) films ==

: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) 20:47, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:Indian Paintbrush (company) films to :Category:Indian Paintbrush films

:Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary disambiguation. No other category with "indian paintbrush" currently exists and even if they did, "films" exists as a natural disambiguator. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 15:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:26, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:33, 9 December 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:People associated with Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie ==

: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. A rename nomination might find consensus, and as such there is no prejudice against speedy renomination. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|People associated with Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie}}

:Nominator's rationale: Vague and unnecessary. WP:ASSOCIATEDWITH concerns. For most entires, won't be WP:CATDEF meamemg (talk) 23:37, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete, textbook case of WP:OCASSOC. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment This is how the lawyer/company intersection categories have historically been formed, see :Category:People by law firm in the United States. If there is a problem with the nominated category, other categories in this parent category should be examined as well. Clay (talk) 16:40, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose Seems to be an association by company. Dimadick (talk) 15:31, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Clay's and Dimadick's comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:25, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:33, 9 December 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.

== Buddhist cave temples ==

: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 as nominated and add a sentence as proposed by Kingsmasher678. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:Buddhist cave temples in Andhra Pradesh to :Category:Buddhist caves in Andhra Pradesh

:* Propose renaming :Category:Buddhist cave temples in Gujarat to :Category:Buddhist caves in Gujarat

:* Propose renaming :Category:Buddhist cave temples in Madhya Pradesh to :Category:Buddhist caves in Madhya Pradesh

:* Propose renaming :Category:Buddhist cave temples in Maharashtra to :Category:Buddhist caves in Maharashtra

:Nominator's rationale: rename follow-up on this previous discussion and aligning with parent category name. {{Ping|Kingsmasher678|Johnbod}} pinging contributors to previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

::Support rename, but oppose this target. Something to clarify that these are manmade would be nice, because these features are almost exclusively rock-cut architecture not caves. In fact, I think I only saw one natural cave in the whole bunch when I was sorting them by state. That was the original idea I had when I named to cats, though it missed the mark!

::Kingsmasher678 (talk) 17:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  • Support Best solution so far. You can't always tell whether a large excavation began as a natural cave or not. Johnbod (talk) 23:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
  • :I am trying to go through the cave categories right now and these are practically the only group of human structures called caves in the entire tree. It's also kind of irrelevant if it started natural, because it sure isn't now, and would therefore be rock-cut.
  • :Kingsmasher678 (talk) 01:29, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
  • ::I can see you find it annoying that the standard term is caves, but it just is. The forms found in India typically fall into two main types, often both represented at large sites like the Ajanta Caves, viharas, the most numerous, which can't be called temples, and chaityas, which generally can. So "caves" is used as a group term. Johnbod (talk) 02:30, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
  • :::I’m not arguing for the current names, I’m arguing that they should be clarified to be rock cut or at least indicated that they aren’t natural, because in the caves tree, nearly everything is natural. It’s an important distinction. I mean, we literally have an article about the correct term. I’m not trying to call them temples, as I have been told that isn’t right. Sorry if there was some confusion.
  • :::Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
  • :::Also, both of those article you linked called the structures temple, just so you know.
  • :::Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:36, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Rename target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:46, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Rename target still needs sorting out.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

:{{yo|Kingsmasher678|Marcocapelle|Johnbod}} See above relisting comment. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

How about we change to the proposed names, but add a sentence on the categories page that clarify that most of the structures are not natural. After that, create subcategories of the "Caves of India" tree that discern between the reginal use of "cave" to describe rock-cut sites, and the traditional sense. Would this work for everyone? Kingsmasher678 (talk) 01:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

:As a reader and user, I would appreciate that kind of clarification. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 12:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

:* I would not mind such a clarification either. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:57, 12 December 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:Biodiversity Heritage Library Enthusiasts ==

: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) 20:47, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Biodiversity Heritage Library Enthusiasts}}

:Nominator's rationale: WP:OC/U#irrelevant likes. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:08, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

::I somewhat disagree, as the Biodiversity Library is quite a resource for Wikipedia/Wikimedia commons, so relevant to to encyclopedia-building. TiagoLubiana (talk) 10:55, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

::: The problems is the term "enthusiasts". I wouldn't have nominated :Category:Wikipedians who use the Biodiversity Library for deletion as one example, but I'm not seeing what the collaborative value of grouping users who describe themselves as "enthusiasts" is. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on TiagoLubiana's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete, no objection to a category about the Library, but I don't see how a user category can be useful. Maybe start a :Category:Wikipedians interested im biodiversity? Marcocapelle (talk) 04:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, and thus per WP:OC/U. Reminder from WP:USERCAT: "Userboxes should NOT automatically include categories by default.". As for it being a commons resource, my kneejerk reaction is to suggest then that such a category would be more appropriate there than here. But, I'm looking at m:Biodiversity Heritage Library/Get involved. And they suggest editing here, there, and elsewhere. Regardless, the userbox says "loves", so if we renamed this to something suggesting collaboration (ie "doing work"), we would potentially be miscategorizing Wikipedians, which we should not do. - jc37 21:01, 18 December 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:Scientists from Plano, Texas ==

: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) 17:02, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Scientists from Plano, Texas to :Category:People from Plano, Texas

:Nominator's rationale: Category with two entries. Also upmerge entries to Scientists from Texas, Lost in Quebec (talk) 19:27, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's and Flurrious's comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:44, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

  • Oppose Cat now has 6 entries. LibStar (talk) 01:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Is six enough to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:28, 9 December 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:People executed by the United States federal government by lethal injection ==

: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) 17:02, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|People executed by the United States federal government by lethal injection}}

:Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary category that duplicates :Category:21st-century executions by the United States federal government. All 16 entries are in that category and vice versa. Lost in Quebec (talk) 22:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:41, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

:{{yo|Lost in Quebec}} Thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:28, 9 December 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:13th-century French physicists ==

: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:French physicists and :Category:13th-century French scientists. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:02, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose splitting :Category:13th-century French physicists to :Category:Medieval French physicists and :Category:13th-century French scientists

:Nominator's rationale: Isolated category, upmerge for now. SMasonGarrison 01:47, 9 December 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.