< January 12 January 14 >

January 13

Category:8th-century Sasanian monarchs

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:44, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The Sasanid empire was destroyed in 651. There are no monarchs after that date. DrKay (talk) 19:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
They weren't monarchs though, they were exiled princes at best. They didn't rule anything. There's always gonna be a bunch of royals who try to restore the rule of their fallen dynasty, doesn't make them a monarch though. There is a reason Yazdegerd III is called the last Sasanian king [1]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:50, 13 January 2019 (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:Miyazaki, Miyazaki

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. Timrollpickering (Talk) 23:13, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per the main article, Miyazaki (city), which was moved to its present title 4 months ago. This is a contested speedy (pinging User:Feminist and User:Armbrust). -- Black Falcon (talk) 18:10, 13 January 2019 (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:Retired YouTubers

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) 05:29, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: unnecessary cat, not defining. Störm (talk) 09:09, 13 January 2019 (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:Insurgents

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: soft merge and remove the subcat from the hierarchy. (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 22:38, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Small category. No obvious difference between insurgents and the much better populated category of rebels. Insurgents seem generally to be armed rebels, but most of the existing categorised rebels were armed. Rathfelder (talk) 08:18, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the current members of the category are:
If this is not relisted, then at least one sub-cat is called "insurgents" and three member pages are currently described in their lead paragraph as insurgents. For these at least, being insurgent seems WP:DEFINING. Those amount to sufficient content to keep the category. I would not object to a purge by re-categorising some of the other contents into more appropriate categories. – Fayenatic London 21:12, 24 January 2019 (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:Former Sri Lankan Roman Catholics

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. ~ Rob13Talk 04:10, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose merging Category:Former Sri Lankan Roman Catholics into Category:Former Roman Catholics. Rather needless fork, per WP:TRIVIALCAT and WP:SMALLCAT. We don't have former Roman Catholics from country X for a couple or reasons, too narrow in scope, as well as these categories tend to be fit as daughter categories of Category:Former Christians by nationality. However about half of all former Catholics join other branches of Christianity (source) so labeling them as "Former Christians" is a bit of a misdemeanor.
The only other article that I came across that could possibly fit in this category is Kiribathgoda Gnanananda Thero, however according to the article his family left Catholicism when he was only a few months old meaning he never formally practiced the religion, as well as the fact that the text mentioning this is unsourced and was removed a short while ago. Catholics make a small part of Sri Lanka's population so it is unlikely there would be many more articles to populate this category. Inter&anthro (talk) 06:56, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The latter refers to the target, so that would be a different nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:22, 11 February 2019 (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:Real Madrid 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: Renamed to Category:Real Madrid CF presidents. (non-admin closure) ―Matthew J. Long -Talk-☖ 22:27, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The list is located in List_of_Real_Madrid_CF_presidents (moved per the RM result of the main article Real_Madrid_CF.) The cat is the only outlier that without "CF": Real Madrid C.F. players (will move to CF version per C2D), Real Madrid C.F. managers (ditto), Real Madrid C.F. non-playing staff (ditto). Without "CF" in Real Madrid Baloncesto players, because the main article is located in Real Madrid Baloncesto, for the basketball section Matthew hk (talk) 02:38, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Matthew hk (talk) 02:41, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Since the nom shows that this is only for the football section, then it qualifies under C2D. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:35, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@BrownHairedGirl: Real Madrid CF is the main article for the multi-sport club and the football section. Technically they are the presidents for Real Madrid Baloncesto too. But since the list was located in the article title with CF suffix, so may be the cat should follow the convention too. Matthew hk (talk) 05:28, 13 January 2019 (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:US officers of Georgian descent

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) 05:33, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Propose deleting:
Nominator's rationale: per WP:OCEGRS. I see no indication that "US military officers of Georgian descent" is a valid encyclopedic topic, and there are no other categories of US military officers by descent. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:56, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
PS: They all serve to expand on the list of Georgians, in this case American people of Georgian (country) descent TheMightyGeneral (talk) 03:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  1. What do you mean by structural purpose?
  2. The reason to remove them is the long-standing guidance against irrelevant intersections, at WP:OCEGRS.
  3. Categories and lists are separate devices. A category does not "expand on" a list, or vice versa. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:45, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  4. No need to merge: all the pages in these categories are already in Category:American people of Georgian (country) descent, because when you populated the categories you added your newly-created category without removing Category:American people of Georgian (country) descent.
The crucial issue here is WP:OCEGRS. Do you have evidence that an encyclopedic head article could be written on the topic of "US military officers of Georgian descent"? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:45, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  1. It are sub categories specificaly for people of military occupation, from the country of Georgia and of Georgian descend Category:Military commanders from Georgia (country). Among those happen to be people who served in the US. To maintain a structure and overview, those two were created. I don't see that as redundant.
  2. The category Category:American people of Georgian (country) descent is broad and encompasses everything. The sub categories are more specific and an extension of aforementioned categories. One doesn't make the other redundant. That's rubbish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMightyGeneral (talk • contribs) 18:31, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • To editor BrownHairedGirl:. I explained my rationale several times now and my reason for better structure and technicality has nothing to do with personal perferences. Please do take the time to read WP:ILIKEIT. TheMightyGeneral (talk) 02:20, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • To editor BrownHairedGirl: Your rationale is not founded in categorisation policy or guideline, and specifically flouts WP:OCEGRS. WP:IKEIT specifically refers to "this section covers deletion arguments based on personal biases rather than policies or gudelines", which is exactly what you are arguing here. You have personal interest in the intersection between Georgia and the US military, but since you have no policy- or guideline basis, your position is pure ILIKEIT. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:30, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • To editor BrownHairedGirl: Sorry, but you don't seem to understand what the term "bias" means, because my rationale has nothing to do with that. My position is as far off from WP:ILIKEIT as it can be. Please take your time to educate yourself on the terms you use, such as Bias. I already stated my reason, rationale and position on this. I don't see further need to discuss this. If it's decided to be deleted, than it is so. TheMightyGeneral (talk) 18:37, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • TheMightyGeneral: you have offered no policy- or guideline-based reason. That's how WP:ILIKEIT is defined.
And some day, I do hope that you find the maturity to refrain from personal attacks. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:08, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • To editor BrownHairedGirl: But you are wrong, and also WP:OCEGRS was never up to debate. I stated my reason regardless, which is everyone's right and that is not up to debate either. What you're doing right now has zero value. I have in no way attacked your person. Such accusation requires evidence and you should probably familiarize yourself with WP:NPA, as with aforementioned terms, due to poor application. Please, take your own advice to heart, admin or not, and before everything else, refrain from making baseless accusations about other editors. Same with insults and derogatory comments. All it does is building resentment and hostility. Have a nice day. TheMightyGeneral (talk) 07:11, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • take your time to educate yourself is a personal attack. As above, I do hope that you find the maturity to refrain from personal attacks. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:24, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • To editor BrownHairedGirl: I am sorry you feel that way, but no, it's not, and I think I would know a thing or two about that. What you are doing however, making assumptions about a person's maturity, could very well be perceived as such by others. Not to mention false accusation is inapropriate and against the guidelines. Once again, you'd be well advised to read WP:NPA and refrain from that, as it's no way constructive. Same with wrong application of terms. That is an observation and constructive criticism, not a "personal attack". TheMightyGeneral (talk) 07:57, 16 January 2019 (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