< August 8 August 10 >

August 9

Category:English-language writers of India

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:35, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate category and the target seems to follow the naming hierarchy within the tree. —SpacemanSpiff 16:37, 9 August 2015 (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:Abandoned military aircraft projects of the United Kingdom

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 nominated. (Though I wonder here if "abandoned" isn't better than "cancelled". All cancelled projects are abandoned, but not all abandoned projects were cancelled. If anyone wants to nominate for renaming the reverse way, it should be allowed.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:34, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The distinction between "abandoned" and "cancelled" military aircraft projects (on Wikipedia) is whether or not the project reached the flight testing stage of development. From this brief discussion, it seems that we invented that distinction here, and it does not serve readers. In most cases (other than these two) each country has either an "abandoned" or "cancelled" category, but not both. Since the categorization is redundant, I propose these be merged. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 13:21, 9 August 2015 (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:3rd-century BC earthquakes

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. – Fayenatic London 16:04, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, only one article in this category and - given the contents of Category:Ancient earthquakes - there seems to be little growth potential. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are very many "ancient" categories for the period from after end of prehistory to approximately 500 AD, so I assume a longstanding consensus exists about this. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:44, 16 August 2015 (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:2nd-century BC natural disasters

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. – Fayenatic London 16:04, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, this double nomination refers to the same article which is a lonely article in two categories. The proposal intends to put this article in two better-populated categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are very many "ancient" categories for the period from after end of prehistory to approximately 500 AD, so I assume a longstanding consensus exists about this. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:39, 21 August 2015 (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:5th-century BC earthquakes

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. – Fayenatic London 16:04, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, only two articles in this category and - given the contents of Category:Ancient earthquakes - there seems to be little growth potential. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are very many "ancient" categories for the period from after end of prehistory to approximately 500 AD, so I assume a longstanding consensus exists about this. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:39, 21 August 2015 (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:5th-century BC tsunamis

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. – Fayenatic London 16:04, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, only one article in this category and - given the contents of Category:Tsunamis - there seems to be little growth potential. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are very many "ancient" categories for the period from after end of prehistory to approximately 500 AD, so I assume a longstanding consensus exists about this. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:39, 21 August 2015 (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:Wikipedian Grasshopper-Club Zürich fans

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:35, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only user in category hasn't edited since 2009. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:19, 9 August 2015 (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:Films about friendship

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. – Fayenatic London 19:18, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE: only after the bot had merged the contents, I realised that this was an invalid nomination as the category page had not been tagged. I am going to leave the merged articles in Buddy films, and redirect rather than delete the category page. – Fayenatic London 19:38, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The two categories don't seem to have any differences. Buddy films by definition are about friendship. Kkjj (talk) 09:46, 9 August 2015 (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:Slovenian people

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename. The main article for this category is Slovenes, and the name of the parent category and its children should be consistent with the main article name, which has been stable since 2008. This is also the thrust of the existing naming convention for the use of Slovene/Slovenian. The current category name has significant potential to cause confusion for editors trying to categorise the large number of Slovene people from places other than Slovenia, including pre-WWII Yugoslavia, but also Italy, Hungary, Croatia and Austria, as it appears to be a category only for people from the nation-state of Slovenia, not Slovenes within the much wider scope of the main article. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 07:45, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Peter, given that, perhaps this category should instead be split into Category:Slovene people for the ethnicity throughout history and Category:Slovenian people for the citizens of the modern country created in 1990? Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 22:26, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not at all, just don't mix things up by trying to morph a nationality category into an ethnic one. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 06:50, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure I follow you. This is the only people category in former Yugoslavia that doesn't have both a nationality and an ethnic people category, and it obviously confuses a lot of people. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 07:05, 12 August 2015 (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:University and college woman presidents

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:Female university and college presidents. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:University and college woman presidents to Category:UNKNOWN
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Sticking the singular form "woman" in the middle of the occupation that the women are doing is not how we gender a category. This needs to be renamed to either Category:Female university and college presidents or Category:Women university and college presidents — I'm not sure which one would be better, which is why I didn't just take this to a speedy CFR. Truth be told, I can also see the potential for a delete consensus on the grounds that gender has no inherent relationship to the topic, but that wasn't the argument I was prepared to formulate here. (Though I will say that I was correct in my prediction of who created the category; it's an editor who did previously get rapped on the nose at least once for seeming to believe that every occupational category that exists at all always had to have a separate gendered subcategory for the women in it, regardless of gender's definingness or lack thereof.) I leave it to others to decide if this should be deleted instead — but if kept, it must be renamed for failing to conform to Wikipedia's naming conventions for categories of this type. Bearcat (talk) 06:21, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't actually demonstrate any consensus to use the singular form — it was actually created by the same user responsible for the silliness under discussion here, and has to be listed for CFR too. Bearcat (talk) 20:33, 21 August 2015 (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:1999 establishments in Dubai

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 to merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:05, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose merging Category:1999 establishments in Dubai to Category:20th-century establishments in Dubai
  • Propose merging Category:1990s establishments in Dubai to Category:20th-century establishments in Dubai
  • Propose merging Category:2000s establishments in Dubai to Category:21st-century establishments in Dubai
  • Propose merging Category:2000 establishments in Dubai to Category:21st-century establishments in Dubai
  • Propose merging Category:2002 establishments in Dubai to Category:21st-century establishments in Dubai
  • Propose merging Category:2003 establishments in Dubai to Category:21st-century establishments in Dubai
  • Propose merging Category:2005 establishments in Dubai to Category:21st-century establishments in Dubai
Nominator's rationale: Double upmerge to grandparent - it is unlikely that this category will gather enough material to warrant navigation. The century level should be built first, then only if sufficient material warrants it the decade or year categories should be made. SFB 04:06, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore I would encourage (one step further) changing Category:1990s establishments in Dubai and adding Category:20th-century establishments in Dubai to the nomination to have both of them deleted, thus keeping Category:1999 establishments in Dubai only in Category:Establishments in Dubai by year. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:00, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's another solution that I would also support. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose merging to UAE only, since Dubai is not just a city, it's an emirate. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:08, 12 August 2015 (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:Establishments in Dubai by millennium

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. MER-C 11:31, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Establishments in Dubai by millennium (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:3rd-millennium establishments in Dubai
  • Propose deleting Category:2nd-millennium establishments in Dubai
Nominator's rationale: Excessive dissections of the establishments category tree for Dubai given the small level of material. SFB 04:02, 9 August 2015 (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:1978 in Baghdad

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 proposed and to corresponding Category:19## in Iraq. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It is unlikely that categories on specific years in Baghdad will gather a wide range of related material. This is better gathered at a higher level for the city - the 20th century tree contains seven categories, yet only four articles. It makes sense to build the century tree first then only narrow down if there is a large amount of disparate material that warrants separation. SFB 03:54, 9 August 2015 (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