< January 1 January 3 >

January 2

Category:Arce administration personnel

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 to delete or merge, therefore rename as nominated. (That could have been a speedy nomination under WP:C2E.) – Fayenatic London 12:08, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Properly distinguish category with Category:Aniceto Arce administration personnel Krisgabwoosh (talk) 01:29, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Fair enough, that would be nearly equivalent to deletion in this case. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it. While it may be relatively empty for now, all vice ministers, ambassadors, and other non-cabinet members belong in it, as is the case with similar categories for U.S. presidential administrations. I'll work to fill it. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 22:41, 20 February 2022 (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:Dark ages

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 tending towards "keep". – Fayenatic London 09:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: capitalise as proper noun.

Nominator's rationale: to agree with Dark Ages (historiography).

Nominator's rationale: to agree with Dark Ages (historiography), but in lower case. [Option C added 11:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC).]

This follows a speedy renaming proposal by Brandmeister, which I believe needs a full discussion.

copy of speedy discussion
Comment Brandmeister a full discussion might be better to establish whether dark ages is a proper noun per WP:NCCAPS. The category had Dark Ages (historiography) linked with a cat main template, but I changed the link to cat more as the article focuses on one Dark Age. TSventon (talk) 13:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed the target to Dark Ages (historiography) per C2D, though the parenthetical disambiguation may be hypercorrect. Brandmeistertalk 14:02, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I still think a full discussion would be useful. "Dark Ages (historiography)" is about the use of Dark Ages to describe the Early Middle Ages, which is only one part of this category. TSventon (talk) 14:22, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't mind in that case. Brandmeistertalk 15:11, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TSventon (talk) 20:37, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SHAREDNAME is just not an issue here - there is a very clear shared historical or historiographic concept here, which has given the name, even if the degree to which the various examples are currently believed to have actually had a "Dark Age" varies a lot. Note Category:Golden ages (metaphor) - the rather bizarre name taken from the main article, inappropriately imo. Johnbod (talk) 04:38, 5 January 2022 (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:Living people by year

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. Clear consensus to delete. (non-admin closure) UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia:Overcategorization when there is already Category:Living people and xxxx births. Bamyers99 (talk) 19:08, 2 January 2022 (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.

Template:Myanmar-festival-stub

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) 06:48, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: One usage; two other countries are similarly upmerged to Category:Festival stubs. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:32, 2 January 2022 (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:New Mexico geologic formation stubs

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) 21:53, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Only one usage; similar stub types have been upmerged to Category:Western United States geologic formation stubs. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:30, 2 January 2022 (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.

Template:Micrarctiina-stub

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) 22:25, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only used on the eponymous article. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:27, 2 January 2022 (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:Agder church stubs

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) 06:56, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Unused; some similar stub types have been upmerged to Category:Norwegian church stubs. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:20, 2 January 2022 (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.

Template:Incremental-videogame-stub

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) 22:30, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category:Incremental games is already pretty small, but this one is only used once. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:07, 2 January 2022 (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.

Template:GeorgiaUS-legislative-committee-stub

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) 07:07, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unused; apparently the only "legislative committee" stub type. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:38, 2 January 2022 (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.

Template:Greenland-law-bio-stub

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 January 10#Template:Greenland-law-bio-stub

Template:Greenland-diplomat-stub

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) 22:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unused; even the parent Category:Greenlandic government biography stubs contains only two articles. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:35, 2 January 2022 (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.

Template:Catalonia-painter-stub

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 January 10#Template:Catalonia-painter-stub

Template:Arizona-airport-stub

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 February 20#Template:Arizona-airport-stub

Template:MiddleEarth-stub

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: result (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 07:01, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unused; upmerge or delete. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:27, 2 January 2022 (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:Royal houses of Armenian kingdoms

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. No explanation was given as to why the sub-cat doesn't belong in the other parent Category:Armenian kingdoms, so I will merge it there, but feel free to remove it from there if that's incorrect or unhelpful. – Fayenatic London 22:43, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with one subcategory. No need to merge, the subcategory is already in Category:European royal families. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:20, 2 January 2022 (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.

Ruling families of counties and duchies

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 "ruling families", i.e.

– Fayenatic London 22:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Propose merging Category:Dynasties of the states of the Holy Roman Empire to Category:Noble families of the Holy Roman Empire
  • Propose renaming Category:Royal houses of the Duchy of Berg to Category:Noble families of the Duchy of Berg
  • Propose renaming Category:Royal houses of the Duchy of Brabant to Category:Noble families of the Duchy of Brabant
  • Propose renaming Category:Royal houses of the Margraviate of Brandenburg to Category:Noble families of the Margraviate of Brandenburg
  • Propose renaming Category:Royal houses of the County of Burgundy to Category:Noble families of the County of Burgundy
  • Propose renaming Category:Royal houses of the County of Flanders to Category:Noble families of the County of Flanders
  • Propose renaming Category:Royal houses of the Duchy of Guelders to Category:Noble families of the Duchy of Guelders
  • Propose merging Category:Royal houses of the County of Holland to Category:Nobility of the County of Holland
  • Propose renaming Category:Royal houses of the Duchy of Limburg to Category:Noble families of the Duchy of Limburg
  • Propose renaming Category:Royal houses of the Duchy of Lower Lorraine to Category:Noble families of the Duchy of Lower Lorraine
  • Propose merging Category:Royal houses of the Duchy of Saxony to Category:Saxon noble families
  • Propose renaming Category:Royal houses of the Duchy of Swabia to Category:Swabian noble families
  • Propose renaming Category:Royal houses of the Rulers of Thuringia to Category:Noble families of Thuringia
  • Propose renaming Category:Royal houses of the County of Zutphen to Category:Noble families of the County of Zutphen
Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content, these were dukes and counts rather than royals. Also reparent these categories, e.g. Category:Noble families of the Duchy of Brabant should become part of Category:Dutch noble families instead of Category:Royal houses of the Netherlands. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:18, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure about this. We have extensive category trees with royal families and noble families. Categories "Ruling families of x" will fall in between, i.e. they will lack proper parenting. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:11, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok fair point. In any case I would re-parent these categories from the royal tree to the nobility tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:34, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice catch, thank you! Yes, agree on Category:Noble families of the Duchy of Saxony. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:29, 5 January 2022 (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:Burial sites of the House of Glücksburg (Denmark)

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 22:30, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, one article in each category. We might also merge them higher up in the hierarchy to Category:Burial sites of the House of Oldenburg because after the proposed merge Category:Burial sites of the House of Glücksburg will still remain very small. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:51, 2 January 2022 (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:Burial sites of the House of Rurik

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:Burial sites of the Rurik dynasty. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:42, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: merge, the two categories seem to have the same purpose. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:45, 2 January 2022 (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:Books about American repression

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) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:49, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Unclear conclusion criteria, thereby failing WP:INDISCRIMINATE. "Repression" is a contested, diffuse concept that is not made clearer by adding "American" to it. Only one of the members uses the word "repression" in the body or title—Political Repression in Modern America. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 03:21, 2 January 2022 (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:Doujin soft

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. I will move the Developers category up to the parent Doujin. – Fayenatic London 22:27, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Seems to me that all of the articles in this category are not merely software, but video games. Either way, the category should be more clearly specified, and possibly another "Doujin soft" parent category created to include anything that may be notable in the software department that isn't a video game (but there don't seem to be any at the moment). ZXCVBNM (TALK) 01:33, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • There is still a difference between studios and games. Many articles are about games but e.g. Carpe Fulgur is about a studio. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:26, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think what should be suggested is that there is a parent category "Doujin soft", which can have "Doujin video games" and "Doujin soft developers" as subcats. --Masem (t) 13:24, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Masem: I should have probably included Category:Doujin soft developers as part of the CfD, since that category should really be moved to video games as well. None of them are software developers. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 19:53, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • At least the last two articles in that category are about developers. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:54, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, probably phrased that wrong - none of them are developers of software that isn't a video game. Therefore they'd all fall under the purview of video games. It's been a while since video games have been called "software" in common parlance. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 09:56, 11 January 2022 (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