< February 15 February 17 >

February 16

Category:Modern history of the United States

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, dispersing contents to Category:20th century in the United States and Category:21st century in the United States. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:28, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: disperse among Category:20th century in the United States and Category:21st century in the United States. In most sibling categories by country, the category spans the Late modern period. The current start in the 20th century in the US is arbitrary, an alternative start in the 19th century would not be very useful, as that would nearly coincide with the history of the United States as such. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:55, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • However, the other country categories do not stop at World War II and they include the 21st century as well. It seems like the intro is simply incorrect. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:55, 17 February 2021 (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:Nannies in films

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename. The !votes here were evenly split between "rename" and "delete", and there was no consensus on which of these was preferable. So this close is defaulting to "keep" (meaning "do not delete"), but "rename" since there were editors in favour of this and no one had an opinion that the proposed name was worse than the current name. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:50, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Better, more standard title Clarityfiend (talk) 19:39, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The current title implies that the category is about fictional characters who are employed as nannies, while the category includes only films. Dimadick (talk) 20:52, 16 February 2021 (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:Adultery in films

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. The discussion was a bit muddled, with at least three different proposals being made. A more focused discussion on one of the proposals may result in a consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:54, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The categories cover exactly the same thing, and the target category has the more standard title.Clarityfiend (talk) 19:24, 16 February 2021 (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.

People from Florina (regional unit)

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:People from Florina (regional unit). (non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 17:37, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge all to 2nd level administrative division, except cities and larger towns, in this case except Florina (18,000 people). Note that the nomination also contains Category:People from Meliti (municipal unit) with 6 articles and Category:People from Perasma with 5 articles. These are neither 2nd level administrative divisions nor populated places. Instead they are 4th level administrative divisions each consisting of several tiny villages. People in these two categories were born in different villages. Merge for consistency, in this case. This is follow-up on this earlier nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:12, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It can be checked quite easily. For example you can click on Drosopigi, Florina and you can see that it's in the Perasma municipal unit. I generally consider municipal units equivalent to populated areas as, despite them technically consisting of a multitude of towns and villages, they are generally interconnected, the same way you could say suburbs are interconnected in a city. --Antondimak (talk) 06:05, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The information for placing an article in a category must be present (preferably sourced) in the article without clicking anywhere, otherwise it cannot be WP:Defining. (Spiro Bellkameni was born in Bellkamen, which redirects to Drosopigi, Florina, which after further research leads to Perasma - but being born somewhere is not defining anyway ... this is all extremely tenuous.) Oculi (talk) 11:18, 17 February 2021 (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:WWE 24/7 Champions

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. (non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 17:25, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete as non-defining. This is a comedy title held by many non-wrestlers, for whom it is 100% non-defining. User:Namiba 15:21, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I don't know what the nominator meant by "comedy title". It is a notable title, has a proper article (WWE 24/7 Championship) that was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 1 July 2019; It gets covered in notable biography articles here, here and here for example; and the category as of now contains a lot of entries. No reason to delete it. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:03, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree with Fylindfotberserk,many a time users are confused about reason for nominating something for delition. That's wat happening in my case.Heba Aisha (talk) 16:14, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is non-defining per our policy. It does not contribute in any way to the notability of Rob Gronkowski. It is trivial to the vast-majority of the careers of those who have won it. Please read Wikipedia's policies on categories. Not everything that happens in someone's career is deserving of a category.--User:Namiba 17:09, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: One cannot judge triviality of the cat based on articles of non-wrestlers → Rob Gronkowski. It is definitely important for pro-wrestlers like R-Truth, Titus O'Neil, Akira Tozawa, Mojo Rawley, Drake Maverick, many of whom got a boost in their career because of it. WWE 24/7 is well covered in these articles and in the leads thus contradicting this point in WP:NONDEFINING → "..if the characteristic would not be appropriate to mention in the lead portion of an article, it is probably not defining". - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:50, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(Delete It fails WP:NONDEF) Changed my mind, we should keep the category.Ididntknowausername (talk) 23:06, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would say keep, but remove no-wrestlers. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:29, 18 February 2021 (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:Temples (LDS Church) in Italy

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:Temples in Italy. (non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 17:22, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is only one (Rome Italy Temple) and there probably will be only one for the foreseeable future because the LDS Church is not notably large in Italy. I suggest upmerging to all of the parents. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:15, 16 February 2021 (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:Recipients of the Order of Brilliant Jade

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:05, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Recipients of the Order of Brilliant Jade
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:PERFCAT and WP:OCAWARD)
When foreign leaders and diplomats visit the Republic of China, or vice versa, the Order of Brilliant Jade is given out as souvenir to commemorate the visit. King Faisal of Saudi Arabia, President Juan Orlando Hernández of Honduras and King Leopold III of Belgium are not remotely defined by this award. (Other than Chiang Kai-shek, the only person here defined by their association with China is Frederick Maze who is already well categorized.)
There wasn't a list so I created one right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:02, 16 February 2021 (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:Recipients of the Humane Order of African Redemption

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:04, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Recipients of the Humane Order of African Redemption
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD approaching WP:OCASSOC) and maybe WP:G4
The Liberian Humane Order of African Redemption is a medal given out for three stated reasons, where I've shown the current article breakdown:
1: Performing humanitarian work in Liberia: Anna E. Cooper, Mary Lee Mills, Dougbeh Chris Nyan, A. Doris Banks Henries
2: Assisting the Liberian nation: Jacques Paul Klein, Hendrik Pieter Nicolaas Muller, Ellen Margrethe Løj, Edward Wilmot Blyden
3: Advancing civil rights for African Americans in the US: Marian Anderson, Asa Grant Hilliard III
Despite the broadness of the award, it was also given for other reasons:
4: High ranking Liberian officials: Cletus Wotorson, George T. Washington (Liberia), Alex J. Tyler, Marjon Kamara
5: Other: Two high ranking FIFA officials (Arsène Wenger & Sepp Blatter) and American evangelist Billy Graham
What all these disparate articles have in common is that they do not treat this award as defining and mention it either in passing or not at all. The category is so heterogeneous that it is unlikely to aid navigation but all the category contents are now listified right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:02, 16 February 2021 (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.
More