< July 28	July 30 >

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. bibliomaniac 1 5 03:49, 18 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Walking sharks to Category:Walking fish

Nominator's rationale: This category is as of now too small, if it is renamed it may be expanded. ★Trekker (talk) 21:40, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are there any other articles that would fit Category:Walking fish? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:34, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Probably - see Mudskipper. DexDor^(talk) 06:06, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is also Walking fish which would be the main article.★Trekker (talk) 12:06, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok then rename (and reparent). Marcocapelle (talk) 15:55, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

rename To expand the scope. Dimadick (talk) 08:50, 3 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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 since the main discussion takes places at another CfD page (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 21:26, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Universities producing US presidents (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: From WP:NONDEFINING, "Categorization by non-defining characteristics should be avoided", and I think that applies here. -- John of Reading (talk) 19:18, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete. See also Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_July_25#Category:Universities_producing_US_presidents. DexDor^(talk) 19:42, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: I've now changed the CFD tag on the category to point to the earlier discussion. I suggest that this discussion be closed. DexDor^(talk) 19:49, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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. MER-C 18:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Sleepaway Camp (franchise) films to Category:Sleepaway Camp (film series)

Nominator's rationale: Film series article makes most sense as main page. ★Trekker (talk) 16:57, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rename per nom They are a film series, not random films connected to a wider franchise. Dimadick (talk) 08:51, 3 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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) Mdaniels5757 (talk) 19:32, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose merging Category:Insect fighting to Category:Blood sports and Category:Insect-related occupations or hobbies

Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT ★Trekker (talk) 16:01, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment Do insect fights take place across six legs...? Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:34, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Merge per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:45, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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. bibliomaniac 1 5 02:33, 10 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Advocates of the European Union (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is a very ill-defined category. It is mostly just a list of British politicians who supported Remain in 2016, some of which now are on board with Brexit. It is really not appropriate to describe them as "Advocates of the European Union". There is no clear logic to who is included on this list, and in any case it is a very inconclusive list, mostly chosen at random. It should be deleted. Elshad (talk) 09:44, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete, even if this would be better defined, it would still be a case of WP:OPINIONCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:21, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Conditional delete, I created this category in 2018 as a mirror to the category Critics of the European Union which was created in 2009. The topic was hot at the time and I was attempting to combat WP:BIAS. I think it ought to be both categories that go or neither. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 23:12, 1 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete -- after listifying (if necessary). This largely refers to a British political controversy over Brexit. The issue is complicated because some politicians have switched their position on this. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:13, 2 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete per WP:OPINIONCAT. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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. bibliomaniac 1 5 03:53, 18 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose merging Category:Government agencies of Sharjah to Category:Government agencies of the United Arab Emirates, Category:Organisations based in the Emirate of Sharjah

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary layer, only one member, not helpful to navigation. – Fayenatic London 07:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merge per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note: I found two more, so the category now has three members, making it potentially useful.– Fayenatic London 14:13, 11 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also considering the limited content of parent Category:Organisations based in the Emirate of Sharjah it can still be merged. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:22, 11 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac 1 5 03:20, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If not merged, it should be renamed to Category:Government agencies of the Emirate of Sharjah. – Fayenatic London 23:05, 22 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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 09:41, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose merging Category:Pages using infobox body of water without convert template to Category:Pages using infobox body of water with a non-automatically converted dimension

Nominator's rationale: Merge is proposed as functionally they appear want to track the same lack of conversion of the same parameters in the Infobox body of water, but the proposed merge location is what is implemented in the Infobox body of water as a tracking category. Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 08:08, 10 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac 1 5 00:14, 19 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac 1 5 03:16, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment: Note that this category was not tagged for CFD until today. bibliomaniac 1 5 03:18, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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 09:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose merging Category:Greek culture heroes to Category:Greek mythological heroes
Propose merging Category:Attic culture heroes to Category:Greek mythological heroes and Category:Attic mythology

Nominator's rationale: upmerge per WP:NONDEF, while Culture hero is a nice article, it is not something that Greek mythological heroes are specifically known for. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:30, 19 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac 1 5 03:15, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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: no consensus. MER-C 18:40, 23 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Cathedrals in Uttar Pradesh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, only three cathedrals in Uttar Pradesh. Merging is not necessary, the articles are already in appropriate cousin categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:02, 19 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac 1 5 03:15, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose - Article does not meet WP:SMALLCAT, there are 8 Catholic diocese in the state (Gorakhpur, Agra, Allahabad, Jhansi, Lucknow, Varanasi, Meerut, Bareilly) and two Anglican/Church of Inida Agra, Lucknow). All of these diocese have cathedrals, many of which are not yet articles on en.wikipedia. There is plenty of room for growth. Inter&anthro (talk) 17:53, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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: no consensus. MER-C 18:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Cathedrals in New Delhi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, only three cathedrals in New Delhi. Merging is not necessary, the articles are already in appropriate cousin categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:04, 19 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac 1 5 03:15, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose - three categories is not "small" especially for a category on religious buildings. Inter&anthro (talk) 17:53, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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 Timrollpickering (talk) 17:18, 30 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Bad television (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unencyclopedic name and topic for a category. Similar to Category:Bad music currently at CfD. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 03:54, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete, entirely subjective. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:25, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose. The nominator LaundryPizza03 and Marcocapelle seem to have missed the point of this category. They seem to assume that it is being used to group TV shows which an editor has rated as "bad" ... but actually, it is clearly being used to group articles which are about works which identify bad TV.

The current name doesn't convey that clearly, so a rename is needed. Maybe "criticism of bad television" or "works identifying bad television". But please don't delete a category due to a misunderstanding of its purpose. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:22, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The "bad" part of it is clearly subjective. At best, selectively merge to Category:Television criticism, i.e. without "bad", similar to the category above. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:27, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Changed it to Category:Criticism of bad television (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Espngeek (talk) 13:26, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- @Espngeek, the notice on Category:Bad television says very clearly "Please do not empty the category or remove this notice while the discussion is in progress" ... but you have just removed articles from the category.
  Please put them back, and allow tis discussion to reach a consensus on what to do. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:20, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Speedy delete Complete POV nonsense. Non-defining and subjective. "So bad its good" is a real concept, but this current category does not convey that that is what this category is about, and I'm not sure if we have enough article to really have a category for that.★Trekker (talk) 20:43, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- @★Trekker, this category is misnamed, but it is not a category of "bad works" or of "so bad its good". It's a category for topics which are specifically about selecting bad works. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:06, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment Should Category:Criticism of bad television be nominated as well? Dimadick (talk) 11:31, 21 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suppose the closing admin will apply the outcome of this discussion to that category too, since it was moved out of process. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:13, 22 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There was a breach in protocol in which the contents were moved to a new category while the discussion was ongoing. Please suggest such changes in the discussion instead of unilaterally implementing them. I'm reverse merging/deleting the "Criticism of bad cinema/television" cats and relisting so that proper discussion can continue.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac 1 5 03:11, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete as purely subjective. If kept shouldn't it be renamed as Category:Criticism of television? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete The category is subjective....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:14, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See comments on bad films below. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:27, 2 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Merge to Category:Television criticism as a neutral descriptor. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 01:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete Any show can be a subject of controversies. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 04:35, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment Is this the point of that category? Apokrif (talk) 06:45, 17 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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. In light of the deletion of Category:Bad television. I'll note that a number of the respondents in this discussion seem to have misinterpreted what the category is about (which may have something to speak about the quality of the category itself). bibliomaniac 1 5 19:23, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Bad cinema (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Same as Category:Bad television below. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 04:32, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Selectively merge to Category:Film criticism, the category content is not entirely nonsensical but the category cannot be kept with this subjective name. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:55, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep Could be renamed Category:Bad movies, for instance. There are (presumably well-sourced) articles on this topic, so why not have a category (which is not intended to list individual films; see current category content)? Apokrif (talk) 04:56, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rename. The nominator LaundryPizza03 seems to have missed the point of this category. They seem to assume that it is being used to group films which an editor has rated as "bad" ... but actually, it is clearly being used to group articles which are about works which identify bad film.

The current name doesn't convey that clearly, so a rename is needed. Maybe "criticism of bad films" or "works identifying bad films". But please don't delete a category due to a misunderstanding of its purpose. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:23, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

- If this category is kept, it should be merged with the "Bad television" one bellow, mockery of bad video does not tend to be very specific over if its cinematic, direct to video or television. As for a name "Caustic critism" is a name used to refer to reviews which are mocking or for fun more than actual constructive critism. That could possible be used.★Trekker (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Changed it to Category:Criticism of bad cinema (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Espngeek (talk) 13:29, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- @Espngeek, the notice on Category:Bad cinema says very clearly "Please do not empty the category or remove this notice while the discussion is in progress" ... but you have just removed articles from the category.
  Please put them back, and allow tis discussion to reach a consensus on what to do. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:19, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There are people who like bad movies, in which case we cannot say they criticize them. Apokrif (talk) 10:39, 21 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete Complete POV nonsense. Will surely be abused beyond messure until its removed. "So bad its good" is a real concept, but this category does not convey that that is what it could be about and I don't think we have enough article to have a category for "so bad its good".★Trekker (talk) 20:42, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- @★Trekker, this category is misnamed, but it is not a category of "bad works" or of "so bad its good". It's a category for topics which are specifically about selecting bad works. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:06, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- That was not what the content of the category reflected when I looked at it.★Trekker (talk) 21:08, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  - That's because it has been depopulated out-of-process :( --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:11, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    - That's never good. Makes it a lot harder to tell whats going on.★Trekker (talk) 21:54, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
" Will surely be abused": we can add a warning text in the category, like "please don't include individual movies". Apokrif (talk) 10:37, 21 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete The category and its brand new subcategory group together articles about television series, webseries, and podcasts where people mock "bad" films for comedic purposes. Plus the article Z movie, concerning explicitly low-budget films. The unifying theme is "film mockery", which I doubt merits its own category. Dimadick (talk) 11:25, 21 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"which I doubt merits its own category": why? Apokrif (talk) 23:06, 21 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There was a breach in protocol in which the contents were moved to a new category while the discussion was ongoing. Please suggest such changes in the discussion instead of unilaterally implementing them. I'm reverse merging/deleting the "Criticism of bad cinema/television" cats and relisting so that proper discussion can continue.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac 1 5 03:10, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Adding to my initial vote, selectively merge and delete are not making an awful lot of difference in this case. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:20, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete and if kept rename per my comment on the bad television category. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:06, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Heavily purge -- Identifying particular films as bad is a subjective POV. However the category contains a magazine identifying bad movies. We may also get "wooden spoon" awards for the worst ones. There is thus scope for a category for awards and awarders of bad cinema, but in accordance with OCAWARD, this should NOT contain actual films. I made a similar comment on a small bad fiction category. If necessary these may be merged into a bad media category. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:26, 2 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Comment A bit out of topic, Peterkingiron. The category does not include film articles, but articles about people and works which have either criticized or mocked "bad" films. You will have to be more specific about what to purge from the category. Dimadick (talk) 09:02, 3 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete Any film can be a subject of controversies. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 04:39, 14 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment That's not the point of this category. Apokrif (talk) 06:30, 17 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

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. bibliomaniac 1 5 02:34, 10 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Propose deleting Category:2009 swine flu pandemic in popular culture (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT with only one article. I don't think that flurry of "swine flu" fiction is ever gonna come. Shooterwalker (talk) 00:10, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete per nom (or possibly merge to Category:2009 swine flu pandemic although the video game in the category can actually relate to any viral disease). Marcocapelle (talk) 11:39, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:05, 29 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Merge to parent Category:2009 swine flu pandemic. Not large enough a topic for a subcategory. Dimadick (talk) 09:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

July 29

Category:Walking sharks

Category:E1 Music albums

Category:Universities producing US presidents

Category:Sleepaway Camp (franchise) films

Category:Insect fighting

Category:Washington Redskins broadcasters

Category:Advocates of the European Union

Category:Suspense

Category:Government agencies of Sharjah

Category:Pages using infobox body of water without convert template

Category:Greek culture heroes

Category:Cathedrals in Uttar Pradesh

Category:Cathedrals in New Delhi

Category:Bad television

Category:Bad cinema

Category:2009 swine flu pandemic in popular culture

Category:Disney depictions of women