mic_none

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 May 17 Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_May_17

< May 16
May 18 >

May 17

[edit]

Category:Railway stations in Gävleborg County

[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 16:14, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: One article in each; does not help navigation. All are already categorised in the Railway stations in Sweden-tree and the single-merge target is already in the Buildings and structures in Västmanland County-tree. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 16:53, 17 May 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:Railway stations located underground in Malmö

[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 16:14, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overly specific; 1–3 entries in each. The single-entry target is already in the Skåne County tree. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 16:53, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. »Gommeh 18:19, 21 May 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:Women's Championship (England)

[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 16:14, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The parent article of the category, Women's Super League 2, was recently renamed after the league was rebranded from the Women's Championship to the Women's Super League 2. — AFC Vixen 🦊 16:44, 17 May 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:Guelph Union 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: Rename * Pppery * it has begun... 16:14, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: team renamed to match men's team name RedPatch (talk) 13:56, 17 May 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:Governors of Kopparberg County

[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 16:14, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The county only changed name; no specific article for Kopparberg County. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 10:43, 17 May 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:County Councils of Sweden

[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 Category:County Councils of Sweden to Category:Regioner of Sweden and Keep Category:Regions of Sweden * Pppery * it has begun... 16:14, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: What were the county councils of Sweden (Category:County Councils of Sweden) are now regioner (Regions of Sweden), making a potential mix-up with the category for non-administrative regions (Category:Regions of Sweden). Kaffet i halsen (talk) 16:41, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: What about Category:Regions of Sweden?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:38, 17 May 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:Restoration of the independence of the Baltic states

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 17#Category:Restoration of the independence of the Baltic states

Category:Spiritism

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 16#Category:Spiritism

Category:American women civilians in World War II

[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:51, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories and narrow intersection, we don't have an American civilians of WW2 category. SMasonGarrison 01:01, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, category distinguishes between those who served in the military and those who contributed as civilians. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 04:08, 29 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) 01:32, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@FieldMarine do you have suggestions on alternative renames? Because the challenge I have is that there's not a American civilians of WW2 parent category, so it doesn't make sense to me that we'd have an intersection just for women. SMasonGarrison 20:03, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, Category:American civilians in World War II. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 23:16, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With the continuous improvement of the project, I’m not surprised to see it added, especially considering the magnitude of World War II. One interesting point in my view is the number of women compared to men in the parent category, with women far exceeding men. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 13:04, 9 May 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) 03:21, 17 May 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:Battle of the Blades participants

[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 subcats up to the parent, no consensus on whether to delete the parent. I really wish this had gotten more participation since this "closure" doesn't really close anything, but you have to close the discussion you get, not the discussion you wish you had. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:31, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These people are already notable celebrities or professionals, so clear violation of WP:PERFCAT for appearing on a TV series. --woodensuperman 07:47, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the base category, upmerge the season-specific subcategories back to it. Nearly all reality shows consist entirely of people who have other notability claims besides having been on a reality show — people don't get articles because they appeared on an Idol or Got Talent series, they get articles if and when they go on to parlay their time on a reality show into a stronger notability claim, like getting over WP:NMUSIC with their post-Idol recordings. So nobody is ever notable because they were on a reality show in and of itself — all "reality show participants" categories always consist of people who have other notability claims above and beyond the reality show, because the people wouldn't even have articles at all if appearing on a reality show was the sum total of their notability claim in and of itself.
    We have established a consensus against subcategorizing reality show categories by individual season, so I can't justify a keep argument on the season subcategories — but for the base category, the nominator hasn't demonstrated that this would be subject to different considerations than other reality show contestant categories like Category:Got Talent contestants, Category:Big Brother (franchise) contestants or Category:The Apprentice contestants, which all also consist entirely of people who have other notability claims besides competing on a reality show per se. Bearcat (talk) 17:05, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The difference with the examples you give like Big Brother is that these people came to prominence through their appearance on that show and we have tended to make an exception to WP:PERFCAT for them. However, participants in celebrity reality shows are not afforded that exception and are routinely deleted. This is more akin to Celebrity Big Brother, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 August 21#Category:Celebrity Big Brother (UK) contestants and many, many more examples. --woodensuperman 20:01, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus favors removal of the subcategories; should the parent category be deleted, too?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:01, 8 May 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) 03:08, 17 May 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.

Seasonal holidays

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 17#Seasonal holidays

Template:OrganicAcid-stub

[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 Template:Organic-acid-stub. DMacks (talk) 21:33, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Capitalization edit, since templates like {{Alkanederivative-stub}} aren't capitalized like that... - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 02:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Template:Organic-acid-stub. In stub template names, we put a hyphen between every word. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per LaundryPizza03. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:29, 3 June 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:Wikipedians with an account on Archive of Our Own

[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:Wikipedians who use Archive of Our Own. The Bushranger One ping only 22:51, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename to match the more common naming convention in Category:Wikipedians by website. Alternately delete since it's not clear how this category aids collaboration. * Pppery * it has begun... 13:54, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (as creator) but Rename to Category:Wikipedians who use Archive of Our Own so that it is broader and more inclusive of editors who use the website to interact in ways that do not necessarily involve contributing stories or creating an account. I don't see any issues with the category existing, personally. Fan fiction and fandom are broad topics with much legitimate coverage on the encyclopedia, and given AO3's position of significance as a major platform for fandom communities of all stripes, I think it is fair to have a category available for users to indicate their interest in the website and topics related to it. silviaASH (inquire within) 14:11, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on silviaASH's suggested name?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:23, 8 May 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) 02:38, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep, with rename; defference to silviaASH's suggestion as creator to define their intended scope. I made a few changes to it, solely markup-lint and accessibility. DMacks (talk) 22:55, 16 June 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:Doctors of Divinity

[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:55, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I don't think having a specific degree is defining by itself. I'd love some other opinions because I view it analogous to categorizing psychologists by whether they have a Ph.D., Psy.D, Ed.D., or ScD. (There are differences, but they aren't defining from a wikipedia standpoint) SMasonGarrison 01:32, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (for now) – if you want the category to be renamed, Smasongarrison, we do really need to see the new name. You are right that it should be a defining characteristic, and there was no consensus on that in the previous discussion. Regards, Moonraker (talk) 19:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know about the prevision CFD. I think even something like Doctors of Divinity (people) or People with Doctorates of Divinity. because for me, when I first found it, I thought they are all about doctorates of divitity rather than people who have degrees in it. SMasonGarrison 20:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A doctor is a person, a doctorate is a degree, please see Doctor of Divinity. Moonraker (talk) 13:16, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think a rename is necessary. If anything, just delete, these people aren't primarily known for an Anglophone title but rather for their theological writings and they should already be in an appropriate theologians category. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:17, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For deletion, there would need to be consensus on the "defining characteristic" point. On "Anglophone", this is the English language Wikipedia. What DDs are known for is not helpful; most may write on theology, but not all, so that point falls away. Moonraker (talk) 01:26, 8 June 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) 02:37, 17 May 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:Antoinism

[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 16:14, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains one article and an article that it links to. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:22, 17 May 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:High Integrity Programming 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: Rename to Category:High-integrity programming languages * Pppery * it has begun... 01:55, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Frap (talk) 13:07, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's suggestion for further renaming?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:18, 17 May 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 cities

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 17#Works set in cities

Category:Primitive painters

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 17#Category:Primitive painters

Category:Sandrine François songs

[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 16:14, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one known entry within this category, and per WP:NSONG unlikely to be any further entries created. No need to retain this category given the single entry is listed in the parent article. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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) 02:07, 17 May 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:One (band) songs

[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 16:14, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one known entry within this category, and per WP:NSONG unlikely to be any further entries created. No need to retain this category given the single entry is listed in the parent article. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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) 02:07, 17 May 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:Communications authorities

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 17#Category:Communications authorities

Category:2020s German film 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: keep. The Bushranger One ping only 22:56, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Should also be merged into 2020s film stubs; {{2020s-Germany-film-stub}} has under 60 transclusions - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 20:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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) 02:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We are in the 2020s, so this list will only grow. Peaceray (talk) 22:45, 16 June 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:1980s Mexican film 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: no consensus. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:29, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Should also be merged into 1980s film stubs, since there are less than 60 transclusions - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 21:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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) 02:02, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it probably will. » Gommeh (he/him) 18:22, 28 May 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 Wikipedian humor

[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:Wikipedia humor. Also to Category:Wikipedia lists. Peaceray (talk) 22:00, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unneeded WP:NARROWCAT. Upmerge to parent. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, should be upmerged. I'm assuming that the creator probably intended for more pages to be in there, but that wound up not being the case. Such a shame. I love the Department of Fun. Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 01:06, 17 May 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:State departments of government efficiency of the United States

[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 16:14, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: One-item category, can be easily covered in the main DOGE category. Maybe could be re-created later as there appear to be other DOGE organizations in other states, I do not believe any have created articles. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 00:45, 17 May 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:Pages affiliated with the Supreme Cabal Regime of the English Wikipedia (SCREW)

[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: Speedy delete per author request * Pppery * it has begun... 18:16, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Despite the name implying this is a project page category it instead appears to be a user category that fails WP:USERCAT for lacking any discernible collaborative function. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah long story was I was trying to use this with template categorization and... it didn't necessarily work the way I wanted it to, so please go ahead with the deletion per nom Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 01:04, 17 May 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.