< February 6 February 8 >

February 7

[edit]

Category:Deaf inventors

[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: upmerge. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:17, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
PS When I checked, all pages in each of the 4 nominated categories was already in Category:Deaf people by nationality. So I just deleted the categories. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:30, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization. Occupation and deafness aren't related in these cases. Was previously deleted per Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_March_29#Deaf_people_by_occupation. Peacock (talk) 19:45, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I would also like to include the following categories in this nomination as well. Peacock (talk) 19:48, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Deaf scientists
Category:Deaf astronomers‎
Category:Deaf chemists‎
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.

Flores

[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, without prejudice to any future nomination to consider a name other than "Flores Island (Indonesia)", but which is not as ambiguous as "Flores". -- Black Falcon (talk) 01:57, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Copy of discussion at WP:CFDS
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:Years and decades by continent (Early Middle Ages)

[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 all per revised nomination.
The nominator @Marcocapelle said that some categories need manual work, but I am not sure that I fully understand which ones are involved. Please, Marcocapelle, can you leave a message on my talk to help me identify which actions I should feed to the bot? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:51, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Example
The complete list of nominated categories is listed on the talk page
Nominator's rationale: merge. First of all, the distinction between Europe and Asia is arbitrary and anachronistic in the Middle Ages. If one would like to make a distinction based on foreign relations in the Middle Ages, the continents would probably look like: 1) Europe, North Africa, West and Central Asia; 2) South Asia; 3) East Asia. Second, we currently only have two continents left with year categories in the Middle Ages, Europe and Asia, which makes the continent layer completely redundant. Third, after merging, the year categories will still be of very modest size.
This nomination goes until the year 962, which is the starting year of the years by country tree (see Category:10th-century years by country), which overlaps strongly with the continental trees. This adds another complexity, so the High and Late Middle Ages will be left for a next nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:26, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:34, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Agree with @Peterkingiron: We should only consider "by year" categories for the Modern Period (i.e. after the Middle Ages which is generally understood to be marked by the Fall of Constantinople, or 1500 for round numbers as P suggests. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:02, 12 February 2018 (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.

Children's picture books

[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 all per revised nomination. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge per WP:SMALLCAT, all categories have 1-3 articles. This is not a matter of a large established tree, there are dozens of single articles in Category:Children's picture books. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:09, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – while I agree re WP:SMALLCAT, regarding the merging, most if not all of the picture books are already in the main cat or the subcats Category:American children's picture books/Category:British children's picture books. Would the bot deal with that? Also some of the "picture books" are not picture books at all and shouldn't go in the main cat – I have been trying to fix that problem. Robina Fox (talk) 02:27, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted from CFD 2018 January 15 to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:28, 7 February 2018 (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.
[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: relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 February 16#Category:Songs_from_Carousel_(musical). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to parent categories: I'm pretty sure this one is doomed to never break beyond being a WP:SMALLCAT. Only three entries at present. DonIago (talk) 14:16, 7 February 2018 (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:Fauna of North Korea

[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 Category:Fauna of North Korea, and merge others (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 21:43, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: That, for example, Rufous grasshopper ("found across almost all of Europe and Asia") can be found in a particular part of the Korean peninsula is non-defining.  Example previous discussion: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_January_20#Category:Mammals_of_South_Korea. DexDor (talk) 10:49, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Fauna by country — complete set, except for countries with limited recognition
  2. Birds by country — 119 of 205 are redlinks
  3. Invertebrates by country — 90 of 205 are redlinks
  4. Fish by country — 102 of 205 are redlinks
So despite the unhelpful hyperbole, @Greyshark09 is right about the Fauna category. However, in all the other cases there are plenty of precedents for upmerging country categories to avoid category clutter. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that analysis.  Note: some of the 'categories' shown in blue in those lists are redirects (e.g. Category:Invertebrates of Laos).
I've withdrawn the fauna category from this cfd as even the likes of Monaco and San Marino have a fauna category (containing lists rather than species articles). However that category should be purged (e.g. removing those articles that don't mention Korea). DexDor (talk) 06:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds good, @DexDor.
BTW, I counted the redlinks the lazy way, by just grepping lines with zero pages, so my counts of "redlinks" are actually "categories with no pages", which will include any redirects. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:31, 15 February 2018 (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:Birds of the Faroe Islands

[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. A list already exists at List of birds of the Faroe Islands. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:36, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: That a bird species (e.g. Northern fulmar or Great auk) is/was found on these islands is non-defining. Note: An upmerge to Atlantic categories could also be considered. Note: The birds category was deleted at this CFD, but was re-created (by a now blocked editor). DexDor (talk) 10:35, 7 February 2018 (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:San Beda College alumni

[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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:54, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The school has renamed itself as the San Beda University. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 04:42, 7 February 2018 (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