October 14
Category:Bombaj Štampa
- 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 10:00, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary eponymous parent category for only one song article which is already appropriately categorized in the band's song category. WP:OCEPON StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:34, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:23, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
- 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:Informer (newspaper)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 October 27#Category:Informer (newspaper)
Category:American Jews by national origin
- 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. MER-C 09:13, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:American Jews by national origin to Category:American people of Jewish descent
- Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories. The original rationale stated that the former category was for actually Jewish people, while the latter was for people having Jewish ancestry while not being Jews themselves. However this has become obsolete, as the first category is now merely a container category of national descent categories already present in the descent category tree. The nuance between Jew/Jewish descent would nowadays be covered by other denominational or occupational categories, rather than by the national descent tree. Place Clichy (talk) 15:58, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment, one tree is by continent while the other tree is by country. I am unsure about the benefit of merging continents and countries together into one tree. Why not simple rename the category to "by continent"? Marcocapelle (talk) 18:42, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Marcocapelle: It's not so clear-cut. The one which I guess you consider to be by continent is actually called American Jews by national origin. It contains American Jews of Mizrahi descent, which cannot be considered a by continent tree, although it only serves as container category for national American people of Fooian-Jewish descent categories. Half of the content of the nominated category is already also in the target (I didn't put it there). I would suggest to have the continental or regional subcategories grouped at the beginning with a star (*) sortkey, along with frequent practice. However, they may themselves need to be renamed from American Jews of Fooian descent to American people of Fooian-Jewish descent, in order to remove this ambiguity between Jewishness or Jewish descent, which is what bothers me most here. Place Clichy (talk) 16:58, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- I agree that American Jews of Mizrahi descent is an imperfect proxy of Asian descent, but the category nearly functions as Asian descent in this tree anyway. In fact when the two categories are merged, all country subcategories that are currently in Category:American people of Jewish descent could be moved down into the continental/regional subcategories, per WP:SUBCAT, and we would only have the continental/regional subcategories left as direct subcategories of Category:American people of Jewish descent. Well okay, while I think of this possibility, that's actually not so bad. Support after all. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:50, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- 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:Japan Air Lines accidents and incidents
- 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 as duplicate category. ... discospinster talk 17:15, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Empty cat, wrongly named & a correctly named cat exists at Category:Japan Airlines accidents and incidents. Creator redirected cat to a list article, which is again a duplicate of an existing list. David Biddulph (talk) 15:52, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- 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:Ethnic groups in the Arab League
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 October 27#Category:Ethnic groups in the Arab League
Category:Online service providers
- 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 manually. MER-C 10:05, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Badly defined. The article, Online service provider says: "An online service provider (OSP) can, for example, be an Internet service provider, an email provider, a news provider (press), an entertainment provider (music, movies), a search engine, an e-commerce site, an online banking site, a health site, an official government site, social media, a wiki, or a Usenet newsgroup." That covers millions of things in a pretty unhelpful way. Most of them are happily categorised as websites, or online companies. Rathfelder (talk) 09:59, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:32, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
- Manual merge and delete. Most members are probably suitably categorised already, but the lead article and the subcat will need to be upmerged to some parents. Others such as AT&T Business Internet should be recategorised as ISPs. – Fayenatic London 08:32, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
- Manual merge and delete per Fayenatic london above and the rationale from the nominator. This category is too broad and just too vague. It should be manually split as applicable, using Internet instead of online, as applicable (that is, Internet service provider, Internet news purveyor, Internet e-commerce site, search engine, etc.).--Doug Mehus (talk) 14:26, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- 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:Candidates for speedy deletion as unused redundant templates
- 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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 02:38, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Propose renaming Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unused redundant templates to Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as redundant templates
- Nominator's rationale: The name of this category, used for holding WP:CSD#T3, nominations is as it stands a misrepresentation of policy since the CSD criteria doesn't mention "unused" in any way. See also Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#T3 and unused where the deletion log entry was changed to remove unused. --Trialpears (talk) 00:30, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support for the reasons stated. Obviously we do not want to delete redundant templates while they are still in use, but renaming this category should not lead anyone to do that. – Fayenatic London 08:28, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
- 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.