mic_none

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 April 20 Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_April_20

< April 19
April 21 >

April 20

[edit]

Sportspeople educated at St Bede's College, Manchester

[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 nominated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:18, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between secondary school education and future occupation. WP:TRIVIALCAT. –Aidan721 (talk) 16:05, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the proposed merges While I'm sure there will be some other arguments presented, I have to oppose these based on the nom rationale of trivial – St Bede's College is connected with the Manchester City academy. It's a relevant category for this school. But I would support to delete the proposed deletions, as they were created as shells only for the other categories and it's unlikely other schools have similar relevance, so seem unnecessary anyway. Final comment is that I would hand some friendly advice to nom @Aidan721:, who I see has mass-XfD'd many other specific footballer categories, to perhaps discuss whether to make some of these proposals in future beforehand, even the seemingly non-controversial ones (e.g. if currently-redundant categories have their own scope, they will not necessarily stay empty/redundant and an XfD can be discouraging from future re-creation). Kingsif (talk) 22:26, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Where a player played for a football academy is a trivial intersection as well. –Aidan721 (talk) 14:05, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The point is footballers are being sent to school there. Kingsif (talk) 02:12, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More comments needed on the proposed merges.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:03, 20 April 2025 (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:Oskarshamn in fiction

[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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:33, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article; does not help navigation. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 21:45, 20 April 2025 (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:The Office (American TV series) episode images

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 April 28#Category:The Office (American TV series) episode images

Category:British and Irish contract bridge players

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: split as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:16, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This seems like a very odd merge because we don't combine other nationalities like this or other sportspeople who are northern irish etc. SMasonGarrison 21:32, 20 April 2025 (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:Medieval scripts

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 April 28#Category:Medieval scripts

Category:American ghostwriters

[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 the nominated categories. The additional ones were not tagged, but can be nominated separately. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:43, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge per WP:OVERCAT. There are already subcategories of nationality writers by type - novelist, biographers - and ghostwriters are included in that. Best to keep one category for this than divide up by nationality. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:08, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RanDom 404 (talk) 21:19, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I once tried to initiate dialogue with them about this but did not receive a response. 2A02:8071:184:4E80:0:0:0:D25A (talk) 05:44, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well sign into your account, or create one, and you might find people are more willing to engage with you. These will need to be nominated separately (with a rationale). Jevansen (talk) 06:29, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That sort of bullying of IP users is not acceptable. Nobody is obligated to have an account to participate, and this does not absolve you from responsibility for your actions. 2A02:8071:184:4E80:0:0:0:D25A (talk) 09:27, 27 April 2025 (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:Lists of political office-holders by province or territory in Canada

[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 to Category:Lists of political office-holders in Canada by province or territory. Very rough consensus favoring the splitter at the end, so I am going with the only proposal which does so per WP:BARTENDER. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:55, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Use "of" rather than "in", per Category:Categories by province or territory of Canada. I could have taken this to Speedy, but maybe someone has a better name. Note: the contents are not all holders of provincial offices, as they include subcats for mayors of places within the provinces. – Fayenatic London 22:05, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Which option?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:24, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on LaundryPizza03's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:58, 20 April 2025 (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:Saint Kitts and Nevis geography stubs

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 April 28#Category:Saint Kitts and Nevis geography stubs

Category:Aruba geography stubs

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:35, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There are only 21 mainspace articles, which isn't enough for a stub category (there needs to be at least 60, right?) - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 19:39, 20 April 2025 (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.


Works set in French cities

[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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:55, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:48, 20 April 2025 (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:Albums recorded in one day

[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. If someone wants to make it list, the only member was (as of deletion) Out to Lunch!. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:58, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Single-entry category for a non-defining characteristic. The question of how long it takes to record an album is essentially WP:TRIVIA, not a defining characteristic of the album. Bearcat (talk) 17:42, 20 April 2025 (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:Case studies

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:58, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, not a defining characteristic of the articles in this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:33, 20 April 2025 (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:PlayStation 5-only games

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: split as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Currently, the PlayStation 5-only games category displays games for both the PS5, and its console add-on, the PSVR2. Many PSVR2 games require this add-on in order to play its library (some games work with and without VR, however). There was some discussion on the PS5-only talk page about whether PSVR2-only games should be split off into their own category. There is precedent for console add-ons having their own applicable categories: Category:Sega 32X-only games have their own separate category from Category:Sega Genesis-only games. Jursha (talk) 21:40, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not seeing opposition to the proposal, but the category was not tagged. I will do so.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:19, 20 April 2025 (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:1836 establishments in Liechtenstein

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:19th-century establishments in Liechtenstein and Category:1836 establishments in the German Confederation. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:15, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category newly created for just one thing at an anachronistic name. Liechtenstein was not yet an independent country in 1836, but just a principality within the German Confederation -- but we name "establishments" categories with the name the polity had at the time, and Liechtenstein doesn't otherwise have any other YYYY establishments categories for any other year prior to 1861. So this would be fine as a subcategory of the German Confederation parent if there were several things to file here, but it isn't needed for just one thing. Bearcat (talk) 14:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I believe you are mistaken. Liechtenstein has been a independent state since 1806. TheBritinator (talk) 14:50, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • All members of the German Confederation were independent states. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:38, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Exactly. The German confederation was not a polity like the Holy Roman Empire with an emperor, but more of a strong alliance and all members were independent states. I am indifferent to the outcome of this since I wasn't aware that the other category existed but I should note that the rationale for the merge is largely incorrect. TheBritinator (talk) 19:22, 20 April 2025 (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:People from Kaimla

[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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:02, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated "People from Place" category for a place whose main article describes it as a village (and cites no population figure at all, so it's unlikely to be particularly large). As always, every populated place does not automatically get one of these the moment there are one or two people from there with Wikipedia articles -- it would be fine if there were at least five people in it, but with just two the district level is all that's needed in the meantime. I'm certainly willing to withdraw this if at least three other people from Kaimla can be found, but for a small village that's not terribly likely. Bearcat (talk) 14:09, 20 April 2025 (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.

Campbell's Soup Company

[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 as nominated. WP:BARTENDER going with the name of the article Campbell's, which does not preclude a further rename nomination. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Should be renamed to Campbell's to match the article. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 22:05, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This may need to be The Campbell's Company (per the article), due to WP:PRECISION. And to avoid confusion with other entries at Campbell. - jc37 22:27, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't disagree, but the article itself was moved to Campbell's from the Campbell Soup Company following its corporate renaming a few months ago. I'm proposing a category move to match the article's title, whatever it is. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 22:17, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If/when the article title would present ambiguity as a category name, we tend to look for alternatives. Which is why I looked to the contents of the article to see what alternatives might be available to us. Other options obviously welcome : ) - jc37 23:31, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename target? I don't see any support for the current name.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:01, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:29, 20 April 2025 (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:People by event

[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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, unclear how the two categories are supposed to be different. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:15, 20 April 2025 (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.

Ballets set in the Middle Ages

[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 as in the updated nomination. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:14, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, isolated single-article categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:58, 20 April 2025 (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.

Countries in fiction

[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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:20, 20 April 2025 (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:2001 events in Brazil

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:2001 in Brazil. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:14, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory and we seem not to have any similar category. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:47, 20 April 2025 (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:Entertainers by populated place in 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: merge. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Subcategory with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:43, 20 April 2025 (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:Trophy heads

[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: manual merge to Category:Decapitation. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I don't think that "trophy heads" is a term that is used. I've been looking through many murder and crime categories that have recently been emptied and it is not uncommon for rebels who have been killed to have their heads displayed. But I don't think it's called "trophy heads" and it is not defining. I can't see that this categorization should be merged to any other category. I'm not sure it matters but this category was created by a sockpuppet. Liz Read! Talk! 07:39, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Manually merge to the tree of Category:Decapitation which is sort of the same concept. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:53, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: also unsure about the title, since displayed heads are not necessarily "trophies"—in fact it could be argued that few of them are—but I also note that most or all of the contents would tend to refer to instances of beheading, which is not synonymous with decapitation. Perhaps before the modern era the distinction was rare, but nowadays nearly all decapitations are accidental, with the rare exception of beheadings by terrorist organizations, or possibly some instances involving crime or medical research, whereas beheadings are always intentional—at least literal, not metaphorical ones. I'm not at all concerned by whether the category was created by a sockpuppet, only whether it's a useful distinction. Sockpuppets can make useful contributions too, even though they're not supposed to. P Aculeius (talk) 10:15, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I find no reason for the category to exist. Lord Mountbutter (talk) 18:22, 21 April 2025 (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:Archaeological artists

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: underpopulated category, that doesn't really seem to be defining. SMasonGarrison 02:00, 20 April 2025 (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:Words and phrases by language

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. No consensus has formed, and no consensus is likely to form given the deletion of the proposed merge target and Marcocapelle's observation. A broader nomination taking present circumstances into account might find consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:18, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Please discuss at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_April_7#Category:Concepts_by_language. fgnievinski (talk) 13:58, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Fayenatic london's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:47, 20 April 2025 (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.

Candidates in Ontario provincial election categories

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 April 28#Candidates in Ontario provincial election categories

Category:Ice hockey people from Glasgow

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. ✗plicit 13:33, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content. The category already has a players parent category as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:16, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree players would be a better term but most ice hockey categories are people[1] not players. Lost in Quebec (talk) 08:55, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Aidan's and Kaffet i halsen's comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:22, 20 April 2025 (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 Irish monarchs

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 April 28#Category:18th-century Irish monarchs

Category:English pretenders to the French throne

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 April 28#Category:English pretenders to the French throne

Category:Mass murder in the Gaza Strip

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 April 28#Category:Mass murder in the Gaza Strip

Category:Academics from Reggio Calabria

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Subcategory with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 22:00, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This can surely be populated. SMasonGarrison 22:30, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've already found two from the parent category. SMasonGarrison 22:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 07:16, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:14, 20 April 2025 (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:Lists of attorneys-general of Australian states and territories

[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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Two categories serving the same role. It will also allow the federal portfolio to be included GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:07, 20 April 2025 (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.