Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 25#Category:Roc (mythology)

: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) 21:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Mammal attacks to :Category:Animal attacks

:* Propose merging :Category:Carnivoran attacks to :Category:Animal attacks

:* Propose merging :Category:Ungulate attacks to :Category:Animal attacks

:Nominator's rationale: Non defining intersection. There is no obvious special thing about attacks by mammals compared to non-mammals. Alternatively rename to "Animal attacks by type of animal" and contain all such subcategories. As for the others, they are an unnecessary parent category without enough subcategories to merit such things. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Merge at least the latter two, unnecessary category layer with few subcategories. Better nominate :Category:Bovinae attacks and :Category:Cetacean attacks too. It makes sense to merge :Category:Mammal attacks for consistency with :Category:Deaths due to animal attacks which isn't branched out either. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Merge This is a WP:CROSSCAT that does not make sense anymore. "Animal attacks" is a broader more useful and clear category. Jontesta (talk) 15:54, 27 November 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.

: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) 21:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|NCAA Division I men's lacrosse tournament venues}}

:Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE. User:Namiba 22:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete, these are multi-purpose stadiums. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete This category would be warranted if there were purpose built venues. I didn't see any though. - RevelationDirect (talk) 14:22, 1 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.

:The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

:The result of the discussion was: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:32, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|People associated with the Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales}}

:Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 15:38, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

::Keep{{snd}}I've populated it to seven articles, and I'm pretty sure most of them meet WP:CATDEF. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:48, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete in the spirit of WP:PERFCAT, the Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales was one of multiple employers of the subjects in the category. The category is defining for Pere Alberch only. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• :Keep What does that have to do with this? These people aren't performers, they worked at a specific organization. Plenty of people have worked for multiple organizations. Qualiesin (talk) 00:56, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• :* So they should be categorized by occupation, not by employer. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• : "Performers by performance" counts for "worked at" as well. 'Performers' isn't a literal, narrow description in this case. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:32, 2 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.

: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 Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:32, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|2026 anime television series debuts}}

:Nominator's rationale: WP:TOOSOON category for one television series on a future characteristic that has been predicted but not yet confirmed. As always, just because a television series is planned to premiere on a future date doesn't always mean that date is written in stone -- any number of things can happen to mess with the predicted premiere date, so that this could be finished faster than planned and thus actually premiere in 2025, slower than planned and thus not actually premiere until 2027 or 2028, or collapse entirely and thus never make it to air at all.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation in the late fall of 2025, when we have locked-in 2026 premieres to file in it, but it isn't already needed in 2024 for just one series that's still in the pipeline as of right now, especially when it's already in the appropriate {{cl|Upcoming anime television series}} as it is. Bearcat (talk) 15:34, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete, we have :Category:Upcoming anime television series for this and the article is already in it. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:57, 25 November 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.

: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:Foreign relations of Oman. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:30, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Diplomatic missions in Oman to :Category:Foreign relations of Oman

:Nominator's rationale: Category containing only a list article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 14:58, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

:*Delete and upmerge. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

::Upmerge for now{{snd}}since none of the listed missions have their own articles, this category is unnecessary. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:01, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Merge per nom. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 08:28, 30 November 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.

: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 Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:29, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Currencies of the Commonwealth of Nations}}

:Nominator's rationale: This category is unnecessary. The Commonwealth has no trade or economic policy role and its member states often have very little in common economically. Grouping together 95 currencies on the basis of current or former membership of the Commonwealth makes no sense. No equivalent category exists for other international organisations, including those with significant economic and trade roles. AusLondonder (talk) 13:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:07, 25 November 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.

: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) 21:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Roc (mythology)}}

:Nominator's rationale: This is a category that is, essentially, "performers by peformance" - it's "works that have featured a Roc" and "things named after the Roc", with a smattering of other roc-like mythological birds and one extinct bird that *might* have been the source of the Roc legend. Regardless, this is a pretty tenuously connected group of articles that is, I believe, WP:OC. The main article is already categorised in this category's parent cats. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose Mythological characters and concepts are not "performers", nor covered by a terminology intended to cover actors. Dimadick (talk) 05:27, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• It's a CfD phraseology, not an explicit description of the contents. Football stadiums also aren't "performers", but that description has been used in CfDs for deleting "stadiums that hosted event X" categories, for instance. And it doesn't change the fact that this is WP:OC. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:01, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete, not a defining characteristic of the articles in this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete No clear inclusion criteria. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:00, 25 November 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.

: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) 17:25, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Fictional males by franchise}}

:* Propose deleting {{lc|Fictional females by franchise}}

:Nominator's rationale: Few to none of the things in here qualify as a franchise, making this category misleading. Made by a blocked user. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep; there may be a slight imprecision, but these categories work fine. – Fayenatic London 09:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• :There is not a "slight" imprecision, as almost none are a franchise (besides maybe Bond girls). Most refer to a company instead or are unfitting to belong in the category. I will say that some, like the comics ones, might have to be merged into :Category:Fictional females. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:16, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Comment These seem to be subdivisions by publishing company instead of media franchise. Dimadick (talk) 19:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Merge to :Category:Fictional males and :Category:Fictional females, some subcategories are by company, but it is a hodgepodge altogether. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:09, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: If not kept, merge? Dimadick seems to imply a rename? Still no consensus to change anything... thoughts and further comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• If renamed, then purge the subcategories that are not by company. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:31, 25 November 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.

: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:Rhythm-action games. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:27, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Crypt of the NecroDancer to :Category:Rhythm-action games

:Nominator's rationale: same kind of situation with the Coffee Talk category. Just one main game and the spin off based on The Legend of Zelda. This category also contains 3 non-free files related to both games, but they're just files and don't think that qualifies as enough to keep the category. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Support in principle, the two articles are already directly interlinked. But presumably merge to parent :Category:Rhythm-action games. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:16, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Merge, Too few articles fit into this category making it an undue category by itself.--23mason (talk) 17:23, 25 November 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.

: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. ✗plicit 12:38, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:20th-century French male classical pianists to :Category:French male classical pianists and :Category:20th-century French classical pianists and :Category:20th-century French male pianists

:* Propose merging :Category:21st-century French women classical pianists to :Category:French women classical pianists and :Category:21st-century French classical pianists and :Category:21st-century French women pianists

:* Propose merging :Category:21st-century French male classical pianists to :Category:French male classical pianists and :Category:21st-century French classical pianists and :Category:21st-century French male pianists

:* Propose merging :Category:21st-century British women classical pianists to :Category:British women classical pianists and :Category:21st-century British classical pianists and :Category:21st-century British women pianists

:* Propose merging :Category:20th-century German male classical pianists to :Category:German male classical pianists and :Category:20th-century German classical pianists and :Category:20th-century German male pianists

:* Propose merging :Category:21st-century German male classical pianists to :Category:German male classical pianists and :Category:21st-century German male pianists

:Nominator's rationale: I don't think we need to diffuse at the 5-way intersection of nationality, gender, century, instrument, and genre, especially since there isn't a FOOian-century male classical pianists or FOOian-century women classical pianists parent. ^SMason_Garrison 12:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment, I think that the last category should also be merged to :Category:21st-century German classical pianists. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• :Thanks! My apologies for missing some.^SMason_Garrison 00:00, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Comment: Even though these are 5-way intersections, 151 members means that :Category:20th-century French male classical pianists is not a narrow intersection. I think this nomination needs to be expanded with the French & British C18 and C19 siblings, and those missing from C20 i.e. :Category:20th-century French women classical pianists and :Category:20th-century British women classical pianists. The C18 ones within :Category:18th-century classical pianists are certainly WP:OCNARROW, so perhaps only those should be merged. – Fayenatic London 14:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on FL's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:20, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

:{{re|Smasongarrison|Marcocapelle}} Thoughts? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:20, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

::So I get FL's point about size, but I'd still suggest considering non-classical parent category, such as Category:20th-century French male pianists, which only has 25 people in it, so not much information is really lost in that direction. ^SMason_Garrison 23:31, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

:* By all means expand the nomination with sibling categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:05, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose The parent category FOOian-century women classical pianists should be created instead. Dimadick (talk) 16:02, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Dimadick's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:08, 25 November 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.

: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:Horror films about child villains. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 07:47, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose renaming :Category:Evil child films to :Category:Films about evil children

:Nominator's rationale: As per precedent set on multiple occasions, rename category to make it more clear that this category is intended only for films in which evil children are a primary aspect, not an incidental one. DonIago (talk) 22:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• I guess my question is why we'd even have this category in the first place. What's next? Films about evil middle aged people? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:49, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• :{{user|Drown Soda}} only created the category today; perhaps they will stop by and weigh in on their motives? DonIago (talk) 03:41, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• ::I realize that we already have an existing category for films about juvenile delinquency here, but the "evil child" film is an established sub-genre of horror cinema, of which we have MANY other existing categories (i.e. slasher films, zombie films, serial killer films, haunted house films, etc.) There also happen to be a significant number of films that fall under this genre, which is why I thought it may be useful for categorical sorting purposes. And to be frank, I have no response to NinjaRobotPirate's slippery slope input here. Drown Soda (talk) 04:01, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• :::I don't want to weigh in on the merits of the existence of the category at this time, but I think one thing that might favor it being deleted, if editors want to go in that direction, is that there doesn't appear to be an article about evil child films, or if there is, the category makes no reference to it. DonIago (talk) 05:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• If it is a specific subgenre of horror films then better include that in the category name, e.g. :Category:Evil child horror films and include this in the tree of :Category:Horror films. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• Rename to :Category:Horror films with child villains. "Evil" is purely subjective in nature. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:19, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

:* That is fine with me too. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:36, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

:*:Should it be "Horror films about child villains", or does "with" suffice? Sorry to be picky. DonIago (talk) 20:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Donlago's comment? (Regarding "about" vs. "with".)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:08, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Should be "about", that is the standard in the category tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:14, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

::Yes, it definitely should be "... about [foo]", also per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film#Categories (to {{tq|be more clear in [the category's] intention that it only be applied to films in which foo is a central aspect}}). Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 17:10, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

• Also, sorry to go a step backward, but here are my thoughts on the discussion so far:

1. I agree that the name should include "horror films", not just "films".
2. If it really is an established trope/concept/term/subgenre, I don't think the normally subjective nature of "evil" is a very relevant concern for the naming of this category, and this may even mean that we should use the most common name for it (whatever it is); see for example :evil clown or :mad scientist for similar situations/concepts (both also already used to categorize films).
3. Speaking of evil clowns, I noticed that the category for evil clown films is :Category:Horror films about clowns, so perhaps :Category:Horror films about children is another option to consider (which obv would also circumvent any subjectivity concerns, but I also see why it may not be considered a good option).

:Of course, all of this only matters if we keep the cat. I'm not sure about that, but (like everybody else so far) I'm not voting/arguing for deletion either. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 17:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

::My biggest reservation about #3 is that if the category is renamed in that manner then suddenly The Shining is appropriate for inclusion; in other words, it's a scope change, though perhaps a desirable one? DonIago (talk) 21:34, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

:::That's a good point (thanks for the example, I'm not really that familiar with the horror genre, so I'm not great at thinking of edge cases here), and yes, I think it would be worth the scope change, because it would avoid the question whether "evil child" is an established/significant (enough) trope/concept/term/subgenre to warrant a category (which seems to be a question most people here want to avoid) as well as the subjectivity concerns regarding "evil". It was a rather random idea, but now that I think about it, :Category:Horror films about children also looks to me like a good middle ground between the current name (or, equally, the original renaming suggestion, "Films about evil children") and the general sentiment that NinjaRobotPirate expressed, since (in my eyes) the "evil" aspect/idea/intention would be mostly covered by specifying that the films are horror films and at the same time, it's not too specific (and referring to a potentially non-notable subgenre/concept). And children as a central element in horror films definitely seems common enough to warrant a category. So, now I'm actually leaning quite a bit towards renaming the cat to that, and if you're not opposed to that option (i.e. the scope change), I think the suggestion would be worth a relisting and hearing the opinion of at least the other participants of this discussion on it. (Perhaps listing this discussion at :Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Film would also be good if it is relisted; I didn't want to do that myself shortly before a relisting/non-relisting.) Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 01:54, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

• Rename to :Category:Horror films about children per my comments above. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 01:56, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
• :*Weak support: I think that would be fine, but if other editors come out against the aforementioned scope change then I would likely prefer "Horror films about child villains" as discussed above. DonIago (talk) 03:06, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Oppose this variant as a too big change of scope. There are too many films (including horror films) in which children are the heroes, which is a completely different thing. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:37, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

:*:@Marcocapelle: (Just for clarification:) Recognizing the change of scope (it's a valid point that films where the children are quite the opposite of evil would fall into this category), you would also not say that this (granted, more general) scope is preferable for a category instead of the current one? Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 11:56, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

:*:* No, I wouldn't. When the scope becomes so broad then the category will ultimately contain of thousands of largely unrelated articles instead of a few dozens about one particular theme. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:18, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

:*:*:Ok, thanks for clarifying! I don't think that estimate is reasonable at all in this case (I doubt there are that many horror films where children are a central aspect), but get what you mean (broadness was what I had in my mind when I said {{tq|I also see why it may not be considered a good option}} when I first floated the idea). Since this variant is unlikely to get the needed consensus (considering DonIago's comment), it seems, I'm not opposed to :Category:Horror films about child villains. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 21:05, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

:*:*::Does :Category:Horror films about child villains work for you, {{re|Marcocapelle|Doniago|p=?}} HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

:*:*:::Yes. DonIago (talk) 06:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

:*:*:::{{ping|HouseBlaster}} yes. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:39, 8 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.

: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) 03:33, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

:* Propose merging :Category:Demon superheroes to :Category:Fictional demons

:* Propose merging :Category:Demon supervillains to :Category:Fictional demons

:Nominator's rationale: The combination of demon and superhero does not appear to be defining, at least without evidence that it is. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep, as these seem to be useful divisions of :Category:Superheroes by type / :Category:Supervillains by type. – Fayenatic London 09:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep We do not require "evidence" for category subdivisions. This is not a police investigation. Dimadick (talk) 19:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• :WP:CATDEF states that reliable sources must "commonly and consistently refer to [the defining characteristic] in describing the topic", so it absolutely needs some sort of proof that RS single out demonic superheroes and villains as a class of their own. A pithy comment like calling it an investigation doesn't suddenly make it follow the Wikipedia policies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:05, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Zxcvbnm's latest comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:17, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Merge per Zxcvbnm, and it is also entirely obvious that demons have superpowers. But merge manually because most articles will already be in some other subcategory of :Category:Fictional demons. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:37, 17 November 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) 00:05, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Merge per Zxcvbnm and Marcocapelle. Are there mundane demons who take the bus to work and have trouble starting the lawnmower? This is a minor WP:CROSSCAT and tautological, like :Category:Wizards who use magic. Jontesta (talk) 15:59, 27 November 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.