< March 3 March 5 >

March 4

Category:Taxa named by Ronald Alan Fritzsche

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) 05:32, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT: author is redlinked and category is only populated by one article. He doesn't appear to have described many other species, if any, and is retired. Limited potential for growth. For more info about this and related categories created by this user, see discussion here. Enwebb (talk) 20:42, 4 March 2021 (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.

People from Phocis‎

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:36, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to 2nd level administrative division, except cities and larger towns, in this case except Amfissa (7,000 people). This is follow-up on this earlier nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:00, 4 March 2021 (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 from Kallieis

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:37, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, borderline smallcat (5 articles), but Kallieis is not a populated place in itself, it is a 4th level administrative division consisting of several different villages. As the other 4th level and 3rd level administrative divisions are upmerged to 2nd level (except coinciding cities and bigger towns), merge for consistency. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:44, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't have much to add just please don't call municipal units "former areas". They are there it's not like they were nuked when their administrative responsibilities changed. --Antondimak (talk) 18:01, 6 March 2021 (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 from Delphi

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 March 18#Category:People from Delphi

Category:Television series about journalists

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. Users are free to purge the target category. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:17, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category not offering a very clear or defining distinction from its parent. Literally by definition, a show about journalism has to involve journalists, and a show about journalists has to show them doing journalism, so there's no clear and unambiguous line to be drawn here as to whether a show is "about" journalism or journalists. Bearcat (talk) 16:45, 4 March 2021 (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:Abandoned amusement parks in China

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:39, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Parent category up for merger with "Defunct amusement parks". No clear difference between "abandoned" and "defunct". Astros4477 (Talk) 14:08, 4 March 2021 (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:Grand Canyon, West region

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) 05:41, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The scope of this new category is too vague and ambiguous to be defining. Grand Canyon West has a specific meaning, which is much narrower than this category seems to be. It refers to an area of the Hualapai Tribal Lands outside the National Park, as explained here. "Grand Canyon, West region" does not seem to have any officially defined meaning, and if it did, it would presumably merit an article. Mhockey (talk) 13:04, 4 March 2021 (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:Anglican bishop categories

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. There was not enough discussion about whether Category:Bishops of Australia/Category:Anglican bishops of Australia should be deleted, so if users want to pursue this, a new nomination for Category:Anglican bishops of Australia should be allowed. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Propose to amend capitalisation of Australian Anglican bishop categories to comply with MOS and for consistency. Deus et lex (talk) 11:44, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Laurel Lodged has a fair point about deletion of Category:Bishops of Australia. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:27, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Reply articles are singular, categories are plural. See Category:Roman Catholic bishops by diocese in the Republic of Ireland as an example of the tree structure. Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:40, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • We have had discussions about capitalization before and this is what I recall about it, for what it is worth. While Bishop of Foo is a title, we are categorizing people holding that title. Anglican Bishops of Foo would imply multiple titles, while Anglican bishops of Foo is multiple people. Bishop is merely a descriptor in the latter case, not a title. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:54, 17 March 2021 (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:Assistant Bishops of Mount Kilimanjaro

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. The current common practice seems to be that assistant bishops are placed in the related bishops category. Discussions could be held elsewhere if users want to change this. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:11, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose merging Category:Assistant Bishops of Mount Kilimanjaro to Category:Bishops of Mount Kilimanjaro
Nominator's rationale: Only one. All other assistant bishops seem to be in the same category as the substantial bishops. Rathfelder (talk) 11:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Putting the assistant bishops and bishops category together is incorrect. In England most of the assistant (suffragan) bishops have titles which enables them to be distinguished from the diocesan bishop, in other countries they don't (but this doesn't mean you can just combine them together). One is a title, the other is not. Please go and learn how the Anglican Communion works before making suggestions like this. I would support Marcocapelle's suggestion below for an alternative merge to "Anglican bishops in Tanzania", at least that would retain accuracy. Deus et lex (talk) 22:44, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Did you read the comment above - they are both bishops, but the "Bishop of Mount Kilimanjaro" and an assistant bishop in the Diocese of Mount Kilimanjaro are different things, and it is factually incorrect to merge the two. Merging the category to Anglican bishops in Tanzania is much better for accuracy. Deus et lex (talk) 02:31, 5 March 2021 (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.

Oxidation states identified with non-Roman numerals

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:19, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The IUPAC recommends the use of Roman numerals for oxidation states in names. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:22, 4 March 2021 (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:Works of art commissioned by the police

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) 05:43, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT (there are currently two in the category; there can't be that many), and we don't have a scheme for works of art by commissioner. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:27, 4 March 2021 (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 who purchased a nobility title

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) 05:44, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I'm not sure that this could be defining for someone. The only person it currently categorizes is Jan van den Eynde, who purchased not one for himself but for his son. Categorizing people by purchases they have made is probably not a road we want to go too far down. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:21, 4 March 2021 (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 from Puerto Ordaz

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 from Ciudad Guayana. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:45, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Ciudad Guayana is the city combined from the previously separate settlements of Puerto Ordaz and San Félix. The article is Ciudad Guayana at and main category is Category:Ciudad Guayana, so we may as well have the "people from" category match these. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:08, 4 March 2021 (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:Recipients of the National Order of the Lion

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) 05:47, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:National Order of the Lion
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Recipients of the National Order of the Lion
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Grand Crosses of the National Order of the Lion‎
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Grand Officers of the National Order of the Lion‎
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Commanders of the National Order of the Lion
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Knights of the National Order of the Lion‎
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Grand Masters of the National Order of the Lion‎
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD and WP:PERFCAT)
When heads of state and other officials visit Senegal or vice versa, the National Order of the Lion is given out as souvenir. General François Lecointre of France, Kim Jong-il of North Korea, UNICEF Chairman Torild Skard of Norway, and Princess Margriet of the Netherlands are not remotely defined by this award. (4 of the 37 articles are Senegalese—1, 2, 3, 4—but they don't generally treat it as defining either.) There wasn't a list but there also is not a main article so I shoehorned the current category contents into a collapsible list right here in the Orders, decorations, and medals of Senegal article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:17, 4 March 2021 (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:Recipients of the Order of Philip the Magnanimous

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) 05:48, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Recipients of the Order of Philip the Magnanimous
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD, WP:PERFCAT & WP:OVERLAPCAT)
When foreign royalty and other important guests visited the German Grand Duchy of Hesse or vice versa, the Order of Philip the Magnanimous was given out as souvenir. Alexander II of Russia, Kamehameha V of Hawaii, and Edward VII are not remotely defined by this award. Relations between the inter-married royal houses of Europe was likely also a factor.
Some Hessian nobility also received the award like Ernest Louis, Grand Duke of Hesse, Prince Frederick William of Hesse-Kassel, and Georg Donatus, Hereditary Grand Duke of Hesse but those articles are already somewhere under Category:House of Hesse. Both groups tend to mention this award in passing with other honours. There wasn't a list so I created a one right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:17, 4 March 2021 (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:Abandoned amusement parks

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 to Category:Defunct amusement parks. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:49, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There does not appear to be a clear difference between "abandoned" and "defunct". At this point, it is just a duplicate category and would benefit from being merged together. Astros4477 (Talk) 01:00, 4 March 2021 (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