Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/Today

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut

See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion policies for the official rules of this page, and how to do cleanup.

Deletion tools
Policy (log)
Articles (howto · log)
Templates (howto · log)
Categories (howto · log)
Mergers
Page moves
Speedy
All speedy templates
Unfree files
Transwiki (howto · log)
All transwiki templates

Deletion of a category may mean that the articles and images in it are directly put in its parent category, or that another subdivision of the parent category is made. If they are already members of more suitable categories, it may also mean that they become a member of one category less.

How to use this page

[edit]
  1. Know if the category you are looking at needs deleting (or to be created). If it is a "red link" and has no articles or subcategories, then it is already deleted (more likely, it was never really created in the first place), and does not need to be listed here.
  2. Read and understand Wikipedia:Categorization before using this page. Nominate categories that violate policies here, or are misspelled, mis-capitalized, redundant/need to be merged, not NPOV, small without potential for growth, or are generally bad ideas. (See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Manual of Style.)
  3. Please read the Wikipedia:Categorization of people policy if nominating or voting on a people-related category.
  4. Unless the category to be deleted is non-controversial – vandalism or a duplicate, for example – please do not depopulate the category (remove the tags from articles) before the community has made a decision.
  5. Add {{cfd}} to the category page for deletion. (If you are recommending that the category be renamed, you may also add a note giving the suggested new name.) This will add a message to it, and also put the page you are nominating into Category:Categories for deletion. It's important to do this to help alert people who are watching or browsing the category.
    1. Alternately, use the rename template like this: {{cfr|newname}}
    2. If you are concerned with a stub category, make sure to inform the WikiProject Stub sorting
  6. Add new deletion candidates under the appropriate day near the top of this page.
    1. Alternatively, if the category is a candidate for speedy renaming (see Wikipedia:Category renaming), add it to the speedy category at the bottom.
  7. Make sure you add a colon (:) in the link to the category being listed, like [[:Category:Foo]]. This makes the category link a hard link which can be seen on the page (and avoids putting this page into the category you are nominating).
  8. Sign any listing or vote you make by typing ~~~~ after your text.
  9. Link both categories to delete and categories to merge into. Failure to do this will delay consideration of your suggestion.

Special notes

[edit]

Some categories may be listed in Category:Categories for deletion but accidently not listed here.

Discussion for Today

[edit]
This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025_April_26


April 26

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:Patent legislation

[edit]
Nominator's rationales: (1) I got lost in the category trees before realizing they were not fully connected; I propose to make the smaller category into a redirect. (2) The relevant legislation is almost always national, so "by country" is the right concept. (3) In a few cases, e.g. Patent Act and international treaties, the concept is transnational, so an article can be classified in more generic categories such as Category:Patent law. (4) "Legislation" would be a better title for legislative work in progress, but we have few if any articles about that; the articles are about completed Acts aka laws. I only need to do a dozen manual edits to get this done, I think. I wanted to check with experts here to see if there's any reason not to charge ahead with the task. -- econterms (talk) 20:01, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:OTI Festival presenters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Similar to Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_January_15#Category:Nationaal_Songfestival_presenters, I suggest deleting this category per WP:PERFCAT. Grk1011 (talk) 18:54, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Maywood (band) songs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only one entry (which is itself a redirect), making this category wholly redundant. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 18:20, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Funerals in Vatican City

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, duplicate of Category:Deaths and funerals of popes. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:35, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Czech alchemists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, the term "Czech" became usual in the 19th century and this category is about the 16th century. Or possibly delete the category, the articles are in Category:16th-century writers from Bohemia and Category:16th-century alchemists anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:57, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1st-century texts in Latin

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: manually merge, isolated category, this is not useful for navigation. Manually merge because most articles are already in Category:1st-century inscriptions and Category:Latin inscriptions. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose: Why and how is this not "helpful for navigation"? This cross-category is defining/neutral/verifiable and precise and can therefore be kept. It currently contains 5 pages but can obviously contain more. -Mushy Yank. 18:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lý dynasty in fiction

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, one article only, which is not helpful for navigation. I don't think we need to merge this somewhere, the article is already in proper 13th-century and Vietnamese fiction categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: it is defining/verifiable/neutral and precise, so can be kept. -Mushy Yank. 18:54, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Children's books set in ancient history and Middle Ages

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, mostly 1- or 2-article categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose: I find it helpful (how is it not helpful for navigation?) and I can't see why, when precise defining/neutral/verifiable exist, we should merge them into extremely broad ones covering centuries. It is not only unnecessary, it is detrimental to the project in my opinion. As for the number of articles contained (if that is relevant), one contains 6 pages, another 4 and a subcat!) and was a WP:BEFORE performed to check that those categories cannot contain more pages, anyway? -Mushy Yank. 18:52, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:New Zealand academics lacking usual sources

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This maintenance category doesn't seem to be used, and doesn't seem to have a template connected to it SMasonGarrison 04:27, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Carniolan literary historians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. There's only one person in here. Matija Čop is described as Slovene (hence the merge target) SMasonGarrison 03:49, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1965 establishments the Republic of in Dahomey

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: grammar edit - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 03:46, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Countries in fiction

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:42, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
XXXX in fiction and Culture of XXX is not the same topic. So Oppose. If it has for now one subcat, how is it redundant? -Mushy Yank. 17:34, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Opposing that target too. Too large (Much too large!!!). /Works about XXX/(as you suggest for some countries) COULD have been better (but then update your nomination, please) As for redundancy, not sure. Because the layer allows to navigate more clearly between Category:Works about Europe by country and Category:Europe in fiction by country and helps the reader in a more systematic way. I would leave it the way it is per WP:Categorization: "And subcategories should be categorised under the most specific parent categories possible." (emphasis not mine)-Mushy Yank. 22:13, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Mushy Yank's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:46, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with @Mushy Yank. Oppose merge, leaving as is does not harm anything. Nayyn (talk) 06:54, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Generals of the Army of Duchy of Warsaw

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category, upmerge for now. Only Jan Henryk Dąbrowski is in it SMasonGarrison 03:51, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Piortrus's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
agree with @Prokonsul Piotrus. Just because it is under populated is not a good enough rationale for removal if the category reliable. oppose nomination Nayyn (talk) 06:57, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:West Coast Gold Rush in fiction

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge for now, only two articles in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:09, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Two articles (for now) is enough for a category. Having less precise categories when you can have neutral/defining/verifiable precise ones is not only unnecessary, it is detrimental to the project. Have you done a WP:BEFORE and checked no other fiction works could be contained in the category? -Mushy Yank. 17:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So, Oppose. -Mushy Yank. 22:20, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just added a third page to the category :D -Mushy Yank. 23:20, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Mushy Yank's population?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:42, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
agree with @Mushy Yank, oppose nomination Nayyn (talk) 06:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bobsledders by populated place in the United States

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Subcategory with just one entry. Also merge to Category:Bobsledders by populated place. Lost in Quebec (talk) 00:20, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Seems reasonable SMasonGarrison 04:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/Today&oldid=931652817"