< November 12 November 14 >

November 13

Category:Mid-air collisions in Africa

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) Qwerfjkltalk 17:28, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not enough entries to support an Africa subcategory, or to warrant subdividing by country or continent. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:24, 13 November 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:Sportsmen by century

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 November 21#Category:Sportsmen by century

Category:Africa Movie Academy Award 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: merge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:29, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 15 of them have a single page. If all 17 are upmerged to Category:Africa Movie Academy Award templates then it would still only have 25 pages. None of the subcategories have other parent categories except Category:Template:Template category with no topic or description and Category:Wikipedia template categories. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:08, 13 November 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:RTBF original programming

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: keep. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: La Une, Tipik and La Trois are in the same entity (RTBF); this should be merged into this "parent category". Saisønisse (talk) 09:56, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Differnt channels, different cateogries. Gonnym (talk) 11:43, 20 November 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:VRT (broadcaster) original programming

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: keep. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose merging Category:Eén original programming, Category:Canvas (TV channel) original programming, and Category:Ketnet original programming to Category:VRT (broadcaster) original programming
Nominator's rationale: Eén, Canvas and Ketnet are in the same entity (VRT); this should be merged into this "parent category". Saisønisse (talk) 09:56, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Differnt channels, different cateogries. Gonnym (talk) 11:43, 20 November 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:Netherlands Public Broadcasting original programming

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 November 21#Category:Netherlands Public Broadcasting original programming

Category:Tumblr

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: purge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Very few articles with strong links to Tumblr. Only Tumblr, DashCon, and its founder David Karp are strongly linked (arguably its CTO Marco Arment), but the other articles in the category are linked tenuously at best. Ultimately it just isn't a useful category. WPscatter t/c 18:28, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: purge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:24, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:50, 13 November 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:Poets of the early Islamic period

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Early Islamic period" is ambiguous. I think the original intention was to capture 7th-century poets (muslim or non) who interacted with the Prophet Muhammad. Rename to Category:Poets from/of Muhammad's era, or Category:Poets associated with Muhammad. Al-Andalusi (talk) 08:15, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
While "early Islamic period" might be a common term, it has no clear definition and has completely different meanings to different authors, even on Wikipedia. For example, the Early Muslim conquests article spans 130 years from Muhammad's time to the Umayyad era. Whereas Early Islamic philosophy refers to Islamic philosophy from the Abbasids up until the 18th century (in other words, "early" here means "pre-modern" and does not even include Muhammad's time, Rashidun or Umayyad). The Category:Poets of the early Islamic period in question was tagged with "7th-century poets", but previously contained Category:Poets of the Abbasid Caliphate and Category:Poets of the Fatimid Caliphate, which I unlinked recently as it didn't make any sense to have them under "early Islamic period".
The nominated category is tagged under "7th-century poets" and all the poets under the category were associated with Muhammad one way or another. Whether praising him or attacking him in their poetry. So it makes perfect sense to have the category named after Muhammad's era. Anyone else belonging in this vague "early" era can be listed under Category:Pre-Islamic Arabian poets, Category:7th-century Arabic poets, Category:Poets from the Umayyad Caliphate, or even Category:Poets from the Rashidun Caliphate. Al-Andalusi (talk) 16:45, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Asma bint Marwan was not Muslim. Al-Andalusi (talk) 16:46, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, but then she may be moved to Category:7th-century Arabic poets. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:26, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:50, 13 November 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:Companies' terms of service

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:34, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: If there were an actual article on Google's terms of service, this would of course be useful to categorize it. As it stands, though, it contains articles not specifically about terms of service and is a non-defining hodgepodge. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:05, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The category does include articles specifically about terms of service such as CIV, National Rail Conditions of Travel, comparisons of licenses and services, index of articles related to TOS. It also includes articles which cover terms of service along with their other content, such as Comodo Dragon, Malarebytes. If someone finds articles which have no content about terms of service, because they were mis-categorized, or their relevant content has been removed, they can be taken out of the category. That's not a reason to drop the category, which can be useful for people looking at the state of the art and range of practices in terms of service. Numbersinstitute (talk) 17:49, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:29, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:34, 13 November 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.

Businesspeople by ethnicity

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:43, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge/delete, trivial intersections between ethnicity and occupation, see also WP:EGRS. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:51, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:31, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, many people including Hazaras from ethnics other than Pashtuns/Afghans do not accept Afghan as their identity (see for example 1, 2). Also, There are many Hazaras, born, and living outside, and having citizenship of other Worldresident (talk) 15:02, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:32, 13 November 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:Editor's pronouns 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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To match the article Personal pronoun.
The word templates in the title means we probably don't need to prepend Wikipedia to the category title, though we can if there is consensus for it, I suppose. See also the contents of Category:Wikipedia templates - some of which do have "Wikipedia", and some of which do not. - jc37 02:28, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The templates in the category relate to editors as opposed to pronouns as a topic, so I suggest that the name needs to keep either "editor", "editors' ", "user" or "Wikipedian". I suggested Category:User pronoun templates before, and still find that appropriate.
I have just realised that there is also Category:Pronoun user templates, whose name is similar. However, the phrase "user templates" seems to be widely understood/used as meaning userboxes, so I don't think that any confusion would arise between that other category's name and "user pronoun templates" for the nominated category. Moreover, as Category:Pronoun user templates has been at that name since 2006, IMHO that confirms that there is no need to add "personal".
Failing that, I would prefer Category:Pronoun selection templates to the options in the nomination. – Fayenatic London 20:19, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:36, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:29, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sources just using "pronoun" in the context of gender identification are abundant, this is just the first hit I got: [2]. This example does not concern a reliable source, but I have no doubt there will be reliable sources around too. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:41, 17 November 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:Anti-white racism

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: keep. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:35, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I was looking at all of the redirect deletions that were a part of this RFD discussion and one of these "anti-white racism" redirects pointed to this category. I know the guidelines for redirects are different than the guidelines for categories but I thought since all of these associated redirects were deleted, I would at least raise the question here at CFD. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 07:47, 13 November 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.

American men

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: containerise. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: containerize, these categories are not meant to contain articles directly in it. Being of a gender is not a defining characteristic of anyone. Yesterday I already added a container template on the category pages but it would be helpful to get some support for that before starting purging, because it involves thousands of articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:46, 13 November 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.

American men by occupation

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 November 21#American men by occupation

Category:Almohad writers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 November 21#Category:Almohad writers

Category:The Space Trilogy locations

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) Qwerfjkltalk 17:40, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT and WP:NARROWCAT. The only article is redundant with the sister category Category:The Space Trilogy books. No realistic possibility of expanding this category. Jontesta (talk) 00:09, 13 November 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.

USL First Division teams

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) Qwerfjkltalk 17:40, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Since the USL First Division is now defunct (last season was 2009), there are no current clubs. All teams that participated in the league should be in the same category. BLAIXX 00:05, 13 November 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