< July 17
July 19 >

July 18

[edit]

Category:National Highways in China

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 26#Category:National Highways in China

Category:Psychonautics researchers

[edit]
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 and purge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:20, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This list contains many individuals who are not researchers. However everyone on the list is a advocate for psychonautics. jps (talk) 19:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:02, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:54, 19 July 2023 (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:Nations at competitions

[edit]
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 as per nom. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:C2C per parent Category:Competitions by country and per all children Countries in/at (except Category:Nations at sports competitions). Follow-up to "Category:Nations at beauty pageants" being renamed to Category:Countries at beauty pageants. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:12, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:12, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:54, 19 July 2023 (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:Philosophy writers

[edit]
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 10:07, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Previous discussion was closed against consensus, and the arguments in favor of keeping it were clearly poor, as the contents demonstrate it's not obvious to anyone that "writers" refers to people who aren't "academics." If someone doesn't really "count" as a philosopher, we shouldn't categorize them as one at all. - car chasm (talk) 02:44, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nor do I think it's a good idea to randomly orphan 7 +7 subcategories and 274 + 565 items. The consequences of a deletion have not been considered at all. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:27, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:20, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:53, 19 July 2023 (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:Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine

[edit]
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. An additional rename nomination may be necessary. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 10:09, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only a main article and a subcategory. The subcategory suffices. If kept, rename per main article. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:06, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Government of Ukraine is a main article for Category:Government of Ukraine per WP:C2D, but it should not be the main article for this particular subcategory. If that article only covers the executive branch, it should be expanded to cover the rest of the government and live up to it's name (or be renamed to "Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine"). - RevelationDirect (talk) 17:11, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it shouldn't be. Category:Government of Ukraine is about all the branches of Ukrainian government, while the article Government of Ukraine is about the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine — the government's executive branch. My suggestion is to rename the article to Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, then most of the confusion would be gone. --Base (talk) 20:16, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That would work too. There are some categories that are obvious, like Category:Restaurants in Melbourne but, in general, namesake main articles make things clearer for readers and editors alike. - RevelationDirect (talk) 13:50, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:27, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:53, 19 July 2023 (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:Executive power in Ukraine

[edit]
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:Government of Ukraine. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:07, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Executive power" is unique category component. The only sibling to be re-categorized to Category:Government of Ukraine Estopedist1 (talk) 14:39, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:41, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 11:21, 19 July 2023 (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:Serbian-speaking countries and territories

[edit]
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 all. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 10:27, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename the category as per WP:C2C parent Category:Countries and territories by official language. Iaof2017 (talk) 13:57, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Notrealname1234 (talk) 20:14, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone through lots of texts of constitutions of former Yugoslav, Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, Montenegrin, Slovenian, (North) Macedonian, Kosovan etc. states and territories, and what is WP:DEFINING here is whether these languages are identified as "official language(s)" in these constitutions (or other top-level legislation) or not. Per WP:C2C parent Category:Countries and territories by official language that is also exactly what we should do. Arguing which language which people speak where is extremely WP:SUBJECTIVECAT and WP:ARBITRARYCAT (and if you do it long enough, you will easily arouse needless intercommunal tensions), and pointless, whereas official legal status is an objective criterion to check category membership that we can actually work with because it is all officially written down. Given recent renamings of its siblings, including Category:Albanian-speaking countries and territories to Category:Countries and territories where Albanian is an official language, this is evidently the way forward. At Serbo-Croatian#Legal status I've already given an overview of countries and territories whose constitution says/said that "Serbo-Croatian" (or "Croato-Serbian" or "Serbo-Croato-Slovene") is an official language. This can be done for all of them. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:10, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Griboski @RevelationDirect and I seem to agree we should Rename All. Could you confirm that, please? Thanks!
If so, @Iaof2017 are you as nom prepared to add the other three for Renaming as well? That way we would probably reach consensus. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:19, 21 July 2023 (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:Urban development

[edit]
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 20:31, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Urban development is a redirect to Urban planning Estopedist1 (talk) 18:57, 18 July 2023 (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:Potentially dangerous food

[edit]
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 20:32, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Potentially dangerous food to Category:Potentially unsafe food
Nominator's rationale: Going with the spirit of food safety and "safe to eat" expression, "unsafe" could be a better option, while "dangerous" may sound vague bordering WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. Brandmeistertalk 18:30, 18 July 2023 (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:Arab

[edit]
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. – Fayenatic London 01:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:ARBITRARYCAT WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. I had already removed "Category:Muslim communities in Africa" and "Category:Muslim communities in Asia" with the edit summary "Arabs are not Muslim by definition. This is an incorrect generalisation." (Millions of Arabic speakers are irreligious, Christian, Jewish, or adherents of other religions. Arab =/= Muslim.) But I now see that there are multiple issues with the category as a whole. Why can't people whose native language is Arabic, but have been born and raised outside MENA be called "Arabs", for example? Why does geography matter? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:38, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: (edit conflict) I do think that Category:Arabs may be a legitimate category within the Category:People by ethnicity tree. But it needs to be Purged from "people by nationality" subcategories such as Category:Syrian people and Category:Iraqi people, because this categorisation implies all Syrian and Iraqi nationals are "Arabs", even if their native language is Kurdish, Turkmeni, Turkish, Persian etc. Nationality and ethnicity of groups of people rarely/never coincide completely; in reality, humanity is a series of Venn diagrams. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:26, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Marcocapelle, you saved your edit just before I could add this postscript. What do think of this? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:29, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reopening per Special:Permalink/1163761648#NAC_requests_July_2023.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:12, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Arab world has a geographic focus. Ethnicity transcends geography. I'm afraid you can't have your cake and eat it too, because the word "Arab" depends on ethnicity, as all parents of Category:Arab, Category:Arab world and Category:Arabs show. The term "Arab world" depends on an ethnic group called "Arabs" living in it, even though, indeed, Ethnicity transcends geography (I completely agree with that). That's how "Arabs" can live in Brussels, but nobody would categorise Belgium as part of the so-called "Arab world".
The term "Arab world" is necessarily a generalisation, and cannot be anything other than a generalisation. Some generalisations may be useful for certain purposes (such as the article Arab world), but not for categorisation purposes per WP:CATSPECIFIC, WP:ARBITRARYCAT and WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. (Just because there is an article doesn't mean there should be an identically-named category).
Therefore, Category:Arab world cannot serve a proper categorisation purpose and should be Deleted or Merged, Category:Arab cannot serve a proper categorisation purpose and should be Deleted (and it almost already was before this CfD was reopened), and Category:Arabs cannot have a geographic focus because Ethnicity transcends geography and should be Purged. Repurposing Category:Arab people for individuals is an additional option we can use to fix the issues here (because it is a redirect, we practically don't need a CfS to do it, as I suggested earlier, although formally agreeing to repurpose it for that purpose may be a good idea). Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:06, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Something like this? If you've got corrections or additions, please say so. I wanna do this correctly from the beginning. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:36, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Simpler than that; do it all as renaming, to keep the page history of each category:
etc. I'm not sure the proposal will gain consensus, but I won't oppose it. As a simpler alternative, consider renaming only Category:Arab to Category:Arabs (ethnic group). – Fayenatic London 14:08, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Fayenatic london Thanks very much! Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 15#Arabs and Arab people. You are invited to participate. Should we close this CfD, and change the target of the CfD template at Category:Arab to Category:Arabs (ethnic group) and tell people to go to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 15#Arabs and Arab people for the discussion instead? Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:19, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nederlandse Leeuw: that's not what I said… I meant, either list all of the combination that I listed; or ONLY list 1 category for renaming, viz. Category:Arab to Category:Arabs (ethnic group). Your new nomination does not propose to use Category:Arabs for either the ethnic group or for biographies. I suppose it could be a disambiguation for "Arabs (ethnic group)" and "Arab people", but it goes against the previous CFD rationale not to follow the article name Arabs for either category. – Fayenatic London 17:27, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Fayenatic london Ok what should I change? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's better to keep the concise "1st-century Arabs" etc, so I'd take out all lines of the nomination except the first. – Fayenatic London 04:09, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Fayenatic london I changed it. Is this what you mean? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 05:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's the exact opposite of what I just said, but it is what I meant before. Note: I may be taking a wikibreak shortly. – Fayenatic London 07:31, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Fayenatic london Ok, well thanks for your correction. I appreciate your knowledge and expertise at CfD, I've learnt a lot from you in the past several months, even when we didn't always agree. Hope to work together again after your wikibreak, should you like to enjoy one. Have a good day in any case. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:38, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Notrealname1234 (talk) 16:45, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. We have Arabs, which we need, but we don't need Arab - I even find myself quite confused with a logic behind this. Ethnicity is subjective feature of person's deepest feeling of identity and belonging, so, all matters ethnicity will always be an obstacle rather than solution and encyclopaedia should not meddle into peoples' personal sense of belonging, identity and so on. We have objective parameters like nationality, language and culture, those are relatively measurable things that are registered in various formal and informal ways in public domain, not personal. Then, there is an issue with this Arab cat being a rather unexpectedly small for a category which is supposed to be defining for a member of a large ethnic group (or group itself?). Do we have "German", "Slav", etc categories?
౪ Santa ౪99° 20:16, 18 July 2023 (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:Gaelic Athletic Association clubs established in 1809

[edit]
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 10:30, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT (1 P) in all. The established tree starts later. –Aidan721 (talk) 12:49, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
keep WP:SMALLCAT, as part of a established series. Most series have a bit of tail and this tail is small. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:12, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:10, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:54, 18 July 2023 (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:Berber dynasties

[edit]
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: withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 10:31, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to many CfDs concluding language family is WP:NONDEFINING for countries, territories, states, dynasties, and individual people. Co-nominated with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Iranian dynasties and countries, a follow-up of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Turkic dynasties and countries (the latter has an elaborate precedents background rationale). Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:50, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't see how these are non-defining at all, as it's not based on a language family but rather an ethnicity. SportingFlyer T·C 13:35, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Berber languages, the Iranian languages and the Kurdish languages are all language families. E.g. the Category:Berber dynasties has the category description: "Dynasties of the Berbers", which article in turn says Their main connections are identified by their usage of Berber languages, many of them mutually unintelligible. You can call that "ethnicity" if you like, but it is just "language family" by another name. And we've already established that language family is WP:NONDEFINING for countries, territories, dynasties, and individual people. The "Turkic" AfD recently confirmed that. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:54, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know enough about the Berbers, but I still don't think Kurds are identified through language. The test I'm using is to replace the adjective with either Serbian/Croatian or Serbo-Croatian just because the way the language group is named makes it obvious you're talking about language or ethnicity - if it's Serbo-Croatian and not either Serbian or Croatian, then you can't keep it, but I think Kurds are equivalent to Serbian or Croatian whereas Turkic is clearly Serbo-Croatian. SportingFlyer T·C 09:38, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I buy your premise, because I consider Serbo-Croatian to be a pluricentric but single language (see Declaration on the Common Language by linguists). On the other hand, the article Kurdish languages (plural title) identifies the following languages/dialects (depending on one's point of view):
How do we know these are not separate "ethicities", but one single "ethnicity"? Kurmanjis redirects to Kurds, but Sorani people redirects to Sorani, and Zazas is a separate article. The Lak (tribe) even self-identify with the Lurs rather than with the Kurds. Who are we to say they must be Kurds? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 19:52, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The dispute has descended into a meta-dispute about the definition of the Berber peoples.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:17, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I agree with SportingFlyer, these are defining categories. Dimadick (talk) 06:50, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:49, 18 July 2023 (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:13th-century rulers of Monaco

[edit]
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 10:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT 2 P 0 C. WP:OR/WP:ARBITRARYCAT: François Grimaldi and Rainier I of Monaco, Lord of Cagnes both briefly held Monaco in practice, but had no de jure title with "of Monaco" in it. Rainier is identified as the progenitor of the Grimaldi dynasty, but his son Charles I, Lord of Monaco is the first to be identified as a "Lord of Monaco", both on the official Monegasque govt website and in literature such as page 83 of Françoise de Bernardy, Princes of Monaco: the remarkable history of the Grimaldi family, ed. Barker, 1961 (the main source cited in all three bios). If you search for "first Lord of Monaco", you'll also find "Charles Grimaldi" more often (example). His bio also says he had no predecessor as "Lord of Monaco": None (Rainier I, controlled the lordship of Cagnes). The claim in Rainier's own bio that Rainier I of Monaco (1267–1314) was the first sovereign Grimaldi ruler of the area now known as Monaco. is full of original research, and so is calling him I of Monaco in the article title. I think it should just be Rainier, Lord of Cagnes, Rainier I, Lord of Cagnes, Rainier I Grimaldi, Lord of Cagnes or something, just like the govt website and RS do. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:18, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: The consequence of deletion will likely be that Category:14th-century rulers of Monaco should be upmerged. I'm not sure if I should nominate that category for Upmerging as part of this CfD, or just await the outcome of this CfD first? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:24, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:12, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:46, 18 July 2023 (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:Swiss chronicles

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 27#Category:Swiss chronicles

Category:Bigg Boss Malayalam contestants

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 26#Category:Bigg Boss Malayalam contestants

Category:21st-century women prime ministers in Europe

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 27#Category:21st-century women prime ministers in Europe

Category:Housing in Iceland

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 26#Category:Housing in Iceland

Category:Defensive gun use

[edit]
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 20:40, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This does not seem like an appropriate category because very few shootings are explicitly categorized as "defensive gun use". Most of the articles in this category are cases where someone shot someone and claimed self-defense, and either was not charged or was charged but acquitted; but none of that really represents a reliable source saying that "defensive gun use" occurred. Rather, the use of this category to characterize the listed shootings seems to be original research and, in many cases, potentially POV-pushing. If there were a clear definition of "defensive gun use" I would support just removing those that don't meet that definition, but it's a subjective term and so any category will be subjective too. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 05:40, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:18, 18 July 2023 (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:Philosophers of Judaism

[edit]
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 10:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT, no significant delineation from Jewish philosophy - car chasm (talk) 22:48, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:02, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:13, 18 July 2023 (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:Women astronauts

[edit]
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. Article is currently at List of women astronauts (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:42, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Women is not an adjective; make category consistent with closed request for renaming page List of women astronauts to List of female astronauts Panamitsu (talk) 13:04, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, there is a long-standing lack of consensus (since 2013) about whether "women" or "female" should be preferred for categorisation purposes (I personally prefer "female" for grammatical reasons, but that's not important). No changes from one to the other should be made just for the sake of conformity. It might trigger an endless WP:C2C war without really improving anything. That said, the article space always prevails over the category space, so again: undo that not-uncontroversial RM/TQ first, then I might support this nom per WP:C2D. Until then, I'm not taking any sides. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:07, 23 July 2023 (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:Commodity exchanges in Egypt

[edit]
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: dual merge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:43, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. Estopedist1 (talk) 11:37, 18 July 2023 (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:Croat scientists from Bosnia and Herzegovina

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 July 26#Category:Croat scientists from Bosnia and Herzegovina

[edit]
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 20:46, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Buildings developed by Foo company" is unique solution in enwiki. Undiscussed scheme. Better to mention these buildings at Related Companies Estopedist1 (talk) 06:10, 18 July 2023 (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:Educational structures in the Philippines

[edit]
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: manual delete. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 10:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Educational structures in" is unique name scheme. Some members are not universities or colleges, then just deleting this category Estopedist1 (talk) 05:48, 18 July 2023 (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:High-speed rail in Latvia

[edit]
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 as per Marco. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 10:42, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. Estopedist1 (talk) 05:30, 18 July 2023 (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