February 19

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:Explosives engineering and bomb disposal in fiction

• Propose renaming Category:Explosives engineering and bomb disposal in fiction to Category:Fiction about explosives engineering and bomb disposal

Nominator's rationale: As with other CFDs of this nature, make it more clear that the category should be applied when the topic is a primary feature of the fiction, not an incidental element. DonIago (talk) 17:26, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

UKBot

• Propose deleting Category:UKBot (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  
• Propose deleting Category:UKBot active contests (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  
• Propose deleting Category:UKBot archived contests (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Categories consisting only of or only used by templates nominated for deletion. See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 February 19#UKBot {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 17:13, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Foyle College

• Propose deleting Category:Foyle College (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: per WP:SMALLCAT. Contains only 2 items related to this secondary school in Derry: the head article Foyle College and Category:People educated at Foyle College.
Little or no prospect of expansion. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:44, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Nominator's so called rationale is absolute nonsense and a little hypocritical to say the least. There are hundreds of categories with a similar amount of articles. In fact BrownHairedGirl has created dozens of categories with just a single article in them. See for example majority of subcategories in Category:Ladies' Gaelic footballers by county in Ireland. Djln Djln (talk) 17:14, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Djln: a bit less personal please, and a little more attention to the categorisation guidelines.

Before dismissing a CFD nomination as absurd, do please read the long-established stable guideline WP:SMALLCAT is clear "Avoid categories that, by their very definition, will never have more than a few members, unless such categories are part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme".

There is no "overall accepted sub-categorization scheme" for eponymous categories for schools. If you think that the set categories in Category:Ladies' Gaelic footballers by county in Ireland is not part of an accepted scheme, feel free to nominate them for merger.

As to Category:Foyle College, its only function is to group an article and a subcat which are both cross-linked. That sort of category is routinely deleted at CFD. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:34, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: Oh please crying "personal attack" when you've been called out ! Your logic of "Little or no prospect of expansion" applies equally to Category:Ladies' Gaelic footballers by county in Ireland. Case of pot calling kettle. You ignored WP:SMALLCAT when you created these subcategories but I'm not allowed to. Please explain why ? Please don't just quote guidelines. Not interested in reading them thanks. Djln Djln (talk) 17:47, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Djln:, I did explain it.

And if you seriously (really? really?) believe that there is no prospect of more notable Ladies' Gaelic footballers in those counties, or that there is not an established series of categorisng GAA players by sport and county, then as noted above please feel free to nominate those cats for upmerger.

However, this discussion is not about Ladies' Gaelic footballers; it is about Foyle College. Please do try to stay focused. In this case you don't dispute that there is prospect of expanding the category, and you don't dispute that they pages are already interlinked. So the category serves no purpose, which is why this type of category is deprecated in a long-established guideline which forms the basis of many CFD nominations every day.

Note to closer see the category creator's statement[1]Please don't just quote guidelines. Not interested in reading them thanks. Draw your own conclusions. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:02, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: What a patronising tone and attitude. You've been caught out. Now you're trying to worm your way out of it by quoting guidelines that you yourself have ignored. Guidelines or just guidelines, they are not sacrosanct or carved in stone. They are just the opinions. User:Djln Djln (talk) 18:11, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anna Sui

• Propose deleting Category:Anna Sui (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Subject and two articles insufficient for WP:OCEPON --woodensuperman 13:35, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Actors of German descent

• Propose deleting Category:Actors of German descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: not a notable intersection of characteristics Ivar the Boneful (talk) 11:39, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - Is there a reason you've singled out this one category out of the scores of subcats of Category:Actors by ethnic or national descent? Anomalous+0 (talk) 14:23, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose unless this is a sample nom, to be followed by a general cull of all such categories. Descent is not generally a significant factor in the actor's ability to perform. However we have a lot of such categories, and in this case I not that the male and female subcats each have over 550 members. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:05, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pan-Hornism

• Propose deleting Category:Pan-Hornism (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: It's no accident that there's no article about "Pan-Hornism" on Wikipedia. If there actually is such a thing as "Pan-Hornism", there's no confirmation on either Google or Google Scholar. What more is there to say? Anomalous+0 (talk) 08:54, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. It's a real thing, though it's usually called Pan-Somalism (there's a tiny bit about it in Greater Somalia. Long story short, a minority of Somalis like the idea, residents of other countries in the region don't, and Somalia has enough trouble trying to hold onto its own independentist regions (e.g, Puntland, Somaliland) without worrying about annexing its neighbours. So as a movement it's pretty much dead in the water and I doubt - political shocks excepted - that there'll ever be enough stand-alone articles for a category, let alone a NPOV one. Grutness...wha? 09:58, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. Even if there were an article elaborating on the subject, the 3 categories that are currently the entire contents don't even begin to make sense. Anomalous+0 (talk) 13:05, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -- The category contains 3 articles on nationalism in 3 countries, who of which will be opposed to Pan-Somalism. I recall that Somalia fought a war to try to establish its claim to the whole of the Horn of Africa, ultimately resulting in nothing at all. If we were discussing an article, I would suggest merging or redirecting to Somali Nationalism. As it is potentially a category with one genuine member, it should not even exist. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:02, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]