< May 29 May 31 >

May 30

Category:Assamese Mathematicians

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. Both articles were already in Category:Indian number theorists so a single merge to Category:Assamese people sufficed. (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:17, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The category has only two members, and it is not part of a comparable hierarchy in either of the parent categories. – Fayenatic London 22:24, 30 May 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:Soissonaire queens consort

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 21:27, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge, the Merovingian kings aren't diffused by capital either, so why would their spouses need to be? Marcocapelle (talk) 20:43, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Fayenatic london: All biographies are in Category:Merovingian dynasty already; afaik we never categorize queen consorts as people from the capital of the kingdom; afaik we categorize queens consort only by their country of queenship (Frankish in this case), not by their country of birth (Burgundian in this case). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:14, 19 June 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:People of the Carolingian Empire

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: reverse merge. – Fayenatic London 00:27, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: An unnecessary level of categorization; it's also difficult to differentiate between the scope of the two categories. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:55, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • So, Carolingians are an ethnicity? do you have a reliable source for that? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:52, 4 June 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:100 Tourist Sites of Bulgaria

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. The "delete" votes are based in Wikipedia policy, which adds weight, whereas the "keep" vote uses WP:OTHERSTUFF which is weak. As membership of the list is not permanent, I am persuaded by the argument that it is not WP:Defining. – Fayenatic London 22:02, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was requested to reopen this discussion. After doing some more work on the list page myself, I declined, as the entries in the list were shown to vary quite a lot over time. That discussion is currently at User_talk:Fayenatic_london/Archive19#CfD_oddity. – Fayenatic London 20:00, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: per WP:TOPTEN, and not defining; these places are probably tourist attractions but being on the top 100, which changes from time to time (see article) doesn't define them. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:26, 30 May 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:Elisabeth Shue

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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:22, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEPON. Other than herself and a character she plays, the only entries are other people, which I'm pretty sure we have a guideline against anyway. --woodensuperman 15:27, 30 May 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:Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States from Minnesota

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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:25, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States from Minnesota (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCLOCATION, geographical origin does not have any relevant bearing on the subjects' other characteristics. Place Clichy (talk) 13:23, 30 May 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:Peel Media

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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:28, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category without main article is best combined with the parent category. UnitedStatesian (talk) 12:29, 30 May 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:Tokyo Metropolitan Television

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 without prejudice to a deletion nomination on Category:Tokyo MX. With no comment for over a month since deletion was proposed it's best to put through the name change now. Timrollpickering 21:09, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To correspond with the name of the main article Tokyo MX. —Farix (t | c) 11:07, 30 May 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:People stripped of honors

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:People stripped of awards. Timrollpickering 21:11, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:People stripped of honors to Category:People stripped of awards or positions
Nominator's rationale: This category covers various awards and people removed from public office. I think the concept makes sense (removal of status as a punishment), but should be named more broadly. SFB 16:49, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename as proposed. I think that stripped of position is the loss of a position which is tenured (a full professor) or expected to continue either for a specific term (say, a US state governor) or indefinitely (a British lordship or US federal judge) as opposed to being fired from the typical private employers. I also think that stripped conveys the proper connotation that the act was involuntary on the part of the recipient/holder of the award or position, so removed impeached folks, disbarred lawyers, etc. fit the bill rather than the lawyer who resigns from the bar voluntarily upon retirement, or the various Queens of the Netherlands who abdicate to retire. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:03, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The "or positions" one bothers me as that could apply to any job position loss, whether it's a demotion or a termination, retirement or reclassification, and that's pretty much everyone who isn't self-employed. That would have to be clarified what kind of positions. Note there's Category:Impeached officials removed from office and Category:Clergy removed from office AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:18, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 06:35, 30 May 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:Released from excommunication

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. Duplicate of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 May 20#Category:Released from excommunication. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:07, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It's important describes all persons no more excommunicated by the Church Roltz (talk) 01:39, 30 May 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