< September 30 October 2 >

October 1

Category:Elbe-Weser Triangle

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) 03:21, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:NONDEF. While technically these articles are indeed about persons who lived in the Elbe-Weser Triangle or about places in the Elbe-Weser triangle, most articles aren't referring to the Elbe-Weser Triangle at all. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:55, 1 October 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:People in English history

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) 03:50, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, we normally do not make a difference between living and historical people; see also this earlier discussion. No reason to upmerge because the content is somewhere in the tree of Category:English people or Category:History of England already. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:57, 1 October 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:Ships at the Japanese Instrument of Surrender

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) 03:20, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This seems WP:NONDEFINING. There were a lot of ships present for the ceremony. (And by the way, the Instrument is a document, so these are really ships at the signing of the Japanese Instrument of Surrender.) BDD (talk) 18:50, 1 October 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.

Duchy of Brunswick

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 per nom. – Fayenatic London 22:06, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Category:1830s establishments in the Duchy of Brunswick
  • Category:1840s establishments in the Duchy of Brunswick
  • Category:Establishments in the Duchy of Brunswick by decade
  • Category:Establishments in the Duchy of Brunswick by year
  • Category:1834 in the Duchy of Brunswick
  • Category:1838 in the Duchy of Brunswick
  • Category:1847 in the Duchy of Brunswick
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, too few establishments in a relatively small and relatively shortlasting (1 century) duchy. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:54, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems obvious that we should keep year categories for countries that don't have a WP:SMALLCAT issue, and go to decade or century categories for countries that do. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:46, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ducht of Brunswick should be kept as it was an independent country during this time periold. Tim! (talk) 12:14, 11 October 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:Albanian Essayists

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: procedural close. This was intended to be filed at WP:CFDS, and I've listed it there. --BDD (talk) 19:07, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Wrong naming placed during creating, simply a typo. Mondiad (talk) 16:39, 1 October 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:Pope Francis albums

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:Works by Pope Francis. – Fayenatic London 17:04, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Pope Francis is not a music artist. There is guarantee that there would be a second album like this. If some day there is, then we may reconsider, but for now, Category:Works by Pope Francis should be enough. Cambalachero (talk) 12:29, 1 October 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:Professorial degrees

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 21:39, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There are multiple problems with this cat. Professor is an academic rank, not a degree. No clue where the (unsourced) claim that it "extremely rarely" has been used as a degree comes from, but even if true, if something is this rare, it should perhaps be mentioned briefly in professor (if it can be sourced), but does not justify naming a whole category "degrees" whereas the rest of the world thinks of this as ranks. (Note: a degree is something like a diploma -PhD, MSc, MD, etc- and once you have it you keep it even if you start doing something completely different. "Professor" is a job title and if you switch careers, you lose the right to use it). Second, there are not all that many ranks that fall into this cat and, per WP:SMALLCAT, I don't see why we need a special cat "Professorial degrees" or "professorial ranks" if we have the completely appropriate "Academic ranks" for that. Randykitty (talk) 07:55, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I had a look at Professorial degree. I don't know about Poland, but I am rather sure that this does not apply to Germany. Habit in Germany is that a person who used to be a professor still uses that title after they retire, for example, but I don't know of any cases where somebody got the title "professor" without at the same time also getting the equivalent position. It looks like hardly any article links to Professorial degree (most links seem to come from its inclusion in the ((Academic degrees)) template. --Randykitty (talk) 11:04, 1 October 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:K-LOVE radio stations

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:19, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: MOS:TM ViperSnake151  Talk  06:00, 1 October 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:Hurricanes in Desirade

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; merge contents tp Category:Hurricanes in Guadeloupe. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:17, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-notable subset of Category:Hurricanes in Guadeloupe. All hurricanes that affect La Désirade inherently affect Guadeloupe so it's a redundant, overly-specific category. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 03:24, 1 October 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:Presidents of the United States who were Freemasons

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: listify to List of Presidents of the United States who were Freemasons and delete. – Fayenatic London 22:26, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Presidents of the United States who were Freemasons (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: I realize that this is super important information to certain people, among them various types of conspiracy theorists, but I'm not sure if it's something that we should be categorizing the presidents by: I don't think that being a Freemason is a particularly defining characteristic for these presidents. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:50, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, when we created this category, the intent was not to have a sub-categorization of Presidents... The intent was to have a sub-categorization of Freemasons. For a member of the Freemasons, becoming President of the US is defining (as it would be for a member of any other group or organization). To make the link clearer, perhaps we should switch the terms around... and do a rename to Category:Freemasons who were President of the United States? (this could be matched by similar sub-cats under the broader banner of cat:Freemasons... "Freemasons who were King of England"... Freemasons who were Scientists"... Freemasons who were XYZ, etc. ). Blueboar (talk) 13:06, 1 October 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