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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 12:02, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Twins from ancient Rome to Category:Ancient Roman twins

Nominator's rationale: Matches categories in Category:Twins by nationality and sibling categories in Category:Ancient Romans. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom. (And thanks to the nom for moving this to full) Mason (talk) 02:10, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Pinging @Randy Kryn Mason (talk) 02:10, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the ping. Support per being informed that all of the ancient Roman categories are styled like this. But "Ancient Roman twins" could be my Uncle Mortie and Aunt Rose (God bless their souls, under their real names, real birth order, and real nationalities, but you get the idea). Randy Kryn (talk) 03:33, 21 December 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.

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 12:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Music videos showing Sweden (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Music videos showing Stockholm (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: These are minor subsets of Category:Music videos shot in Sweden/Stockholm, and there is no category scheme based on "recognisable features" shown in videos. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:25, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All articles are already in the two "shot in" categories. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:27, 21 December 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.

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 merge and redirect. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 12:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:People of China to Category:Chinese people

Nominator's rationale: Overlapping category. Theoretically, there is room people with a defining link to a country but for whom we don't have any information or certainty about their citizenship of that country. However, it has proved not practically feasible to keep distinct category trees in the long run. Specifically, for a place with a history as long as China, there are times when going back in history where the notion of nationals vs. non-nationals just does not make sense. That's why individual people are at Category:People by nationality and not at Category:People by country. Place Clichy (talk) 22:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:24, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom, in practice "Chinese people" and "people in China" are indistinguishable, we cannot check people's passports. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:07, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Manual merge and redirect, following categorisation of siblings. E.g. Expatriates in China should not go into the target; it is already correctly in Demographics of China. The merge cannot be processed by bot as it is merger to a sub-cat. Redirection is desirable because there are many interwiki links. – Fayenatic London 09:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could we at some point discuss the correct parenting of categories for expatriates, immigrants, diasporas etc.? Imho expatriates and diaspora categories should not be placed in Demographics of... categories but in Society of... as the people in these categories are not statistics and population science. Place Clichy (talk) 04:02, 22 December 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.

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:Surinamese emigrants to the United States. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 12:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Emigrants from Dutch Guiana to the United States to Category:Emigrants from Dutch Guiana and Category:Immigrants to the United States

Nominator's rationale: Dual merge, is a small intersection that doesn't help navigation. This nom is in the same spirit as Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_May_7#Emigrants_from_former_countries Mason (talk) 21:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Alt merge to Category:Surinamese emigrants to the United States, these are duplicate categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Alt merge to Category:Surinamese emigrants to the United States. Place Clichy (talk) 22:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Totally fine with this alt. Mason (talk) 02:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support use of Surinam, even for a period when it is anachronistic. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:26, 25 December 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.

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 12:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:20th-century executions by the District of Columbia to Category:20th-century executions by the United States and Category:People executed by the District of Columbia
• Propose merging Category:19th-century executions by the District of Columbia to Category:People executed by the District of Columbia and Category:19th-century executions by the United States

Nominator's rationale: Only three people in this entire tree, too small for difussion by century Mason (talk) 21:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 07:20, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:01, 20 December 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.

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 12:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Fictional characters with schizoid personality disorder (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: In theory, this category should be upmerged for now, but it is not defining for the only character in here. Mason (talk) 20:35, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:03, 20 December 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.

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 12:08, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Emigrants from the Colony of Natal to the United Kingdom to Category:South African emigrants to the United Kingdom and Category:Emigrants from the Colony of Natal
• Propose merging Category:Emigrants from the Colony of Natal to Australia to Category:Emigrants from the Colony of Natal and Category:South African emigrants to Australia
• Propose merging Category:Emigrants from the Colony of Natal to the United States to Category:Emigrants from the Colony of Natal and Category:South African emigrants to the United States

Nominator's rationale: Dual merge, these categories are a small intersection that doesn't help navigation. (Not sure if we should merge to South African emigrants to the FOO or Immigrants to FOO). This nom is in the same spirit as Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_May_7#Emigrants_from_former_countries Mason (talk) 19:02, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom, with regret, because South African is anachronistic. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:07, 20 December 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.

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 12:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Emigrants from Dutch Ceylon to France to Category:Emigrants from Dutch Ceylon and Category:Immigrants to France

Nominator's rationale: Dual merge, these categories are a small intersection that doesn't help navigation. This nom is in the same spirit as Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_May_7#Emigrants_from_former_countries Mason (talk) 18:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:10, 20 December 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.

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 nom). (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 12:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Anthropomorphic animals by type to Category:Anthropomorphic animals
• Propose merging Category:Anthropomorphic vertebrates to Category:Anthropomorphic animals
• Propose merging Category:Anthropomorphic invertebrates to Category:Anthropomorphic animals

Nominator's rationale: Splitting animals by vertebrate/invertebrate seems to be WP:NARROWCAT. Pointless new intersection that serves no useful purpose, just place them in Category:Fictional animals by type instead. I should also note that real humans are technically "anthropomorphic vertebrates". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support The Category:Anthropomorphic animals should be placed directly in Category:Fictional animals by type. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I think it's fine the way it is, no need to overwhelm Category:Anthropomorphic animals which is already filled with 9 subcategories. Instead I think Category:Anthropomorphic animal characters should be merged into Category:Anthropomorphic animals, I think that's even less necessary of a category. AHI-3000 (talk) 22:48, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That many subcategories is not going to "overwhelm" anything. Wikipedia servers are not running on hamster wheels, they can handle categorizes with dozens of subcategories. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am talking about simply browsing these pages. There's no pressing need to move 10 categories into another category right now. AHI-3000 (talk) 23:07, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate proposal:

• Delete Category:Anthropomorphic animal characters and Category:Anthropomorphic animals by type (both of them are currently empty category redirects to Category:Anthropomorphic animals)
• Keep Category:Anthropomorphic invertebrates and Category:Anthropomorphic vertebrates (as subcategories of Category:Anthropomorphic animals)

My rationale: Just check out Category:Anthropomorphic animals. I think I've simplified navigation a bit; it's now a subcategory of Category:Fictional animals by type, while I've removed Category:Anthropomorphic animals by type as an unnecessary extra layer. But please don't get rid of Category:Anthropomorphic invertebrates or Category:Anthropomorphic vertebrates, I think keeping them at the top of Category:Anthropomorphic animals will still provide quick and easy navigation, remove them and you fill up Category:Anthropomorphic animals with 10 additional subcategories without any sense of order or reason. AHI-3000 (talk) 06:44, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support original nomination, this tree is not about biology, it is about fiction. Following scientific taxonomy unnecessary complicates the tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:53, 22 December 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.

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 16:34, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Uzbek national dances to Category:Dance in Uzbekistan

Nominator's rationale: One-entry category that will only isolate the article. Note that the article is also categorized in Category:Asian folk dances. Pichpich (talk) 16:48, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:16, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. Gjs238 (talk) 20:44, 26 December 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.

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 16:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Jewish American television producers to Category:American television producers and Category:American Jews

Nominator's rationale: non-defining intersection per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 16:46, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Split per nom. Would add Category:African-American television producers as well because its the only other category by ethnicity. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:31, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If kept, I think that this category should be broadened to just Category:Jewish television producers. (Effectively, my rule of thumb for nominating was whether there was a parent Jewish OCCUPATION category that wasn't diffused by nationality.) Mason (talk) 20:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:20, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Dual merge per nom. Place Clichy (talk) 15:13, 22 December 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.

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: triple merge (also to Category:Jewish film people) (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:36, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Jewish American film directors to Category:American film directors and Category:American Jews

Nominator's rationale: non-defining intersection per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 16:46, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Split per nom: would add other categories in Category:American film directors by ethnic or national origin and Category:American LGBT film directors. I would say keep and create a subcategory in Category:Jewish film people per @Mason's suggestion. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:38, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If kept, I think that this category should be broadened to just Category:Jewish film directors. (Effectively, my rule of thumb for nominating was whether there was a parent Jewish OCCUPATION category that wasn't diffused by nationality.) Mason (talk) 20:44, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:21, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Marcocapelle, what about merging Category:Jewish American film directors and Category:Jewish American film producers to one category Category:Jewish American filmmakers? I would argue the same for Category:African-American film producers and Category:African-American film directors and so on. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  There is a Category:Jewish film people per @Smasongarrison's rule which should be renamed Category:Jewish filmmakers.

  We don't have to get rid of ALL the categories but we can make it more efficient. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • If existing, I'd vote for deletion of Category:Jewish American filmmakers per WP:EGRS too. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:53, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @Marcocapelle, there is a category Category:Jewish film people; this category (and Category:Jewish American film producers) should ALSO be merged with that IF it is not kept. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:30, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    • Yes, fair point. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:57, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Merge per nom and also merge to Category:Jewish film people. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:39, 22 December 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.

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: triple merge (also to Category:Jewish film people) (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:37, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Jewish American film producers to Category:American film producers and Category:American Jews

Nominator's rationale: non-defining intersection per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 16:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Split per nom. Would add Category:African-American film producers as well because its the only other category by ethnicity. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:35, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If kept, I think that this category should be broadened to just Category:Jewish film producers. (Effectively, my rule of thumb for nominating was whether there was a parent Jewish OCCUPATION category that wasn't diffused by nationality.) Mason (talk) 20:44, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom but also merge to Category:Jewish film people. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:39, 22 December 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.

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 16:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Jewish American chefs to Category:American chefs and Category:American Jews

Nominator's rationale: non-defining intersection per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 16:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Split per nom. Would add Category:American chefs of Asian descent, Category:African-American chefs, Category:Puerto Rican chefs and Category:Native American chefs to this as well. As with Category:American inventors, I don't see why this needs to be divided by ethnicity. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If kept, I think that this category should be broadened to just Category:Jewish chefs. (Effectively, my rule of thumb for nominating was whether there was a parent Jewish OCCUPATION category that wasn't diffused by nationality.) Mason (talk) 20:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:25, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Dual merge per nom. Place Clichy (talk) 15:15, 22 December 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.

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 16:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Jewish American lawyers to Category:American lawyers and Category:American Jews

Nominator's rationale: non-defining intersection per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 16:44, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; there are other similar categories by ethnicity and it helps in diffusion. Actually, rather torn by this. Unlike chefs and inventors, I can see why lawyers are split by ethnicity. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:14, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison, Jewish Americans are a minority like others categorized in Category:American lawyers by ethnic or national origin, and are notable enough to have their own list article (in Category:Lists of American jurists). Additionally, there are "American lawyers with disabilities" and "American LGBT lawyers" which isn't the case with the other two nominations. So I wouldn't call the category non-defining in this particular case. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was conflicted, @Omnis Scientia, which is why I didn't bundle all the categories together. Effectively, my rule of thumb for nominating was whether their was a parent Jewish OCCUPATION category that wasn't diffused by nationality. If kept, I think that this category should be broadened to just Jewish lawyers. Mason (talk) 20:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison, that makes sense. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:48, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also sorry to spam the same comment at you. I wanted to make sure that the reasoning was clear if the nominations get separated when/if they're relisted. Mason (talk) 20:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison, no worries! Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Marcocapelle, I would say keep this particular one. I created a Category:Jewish lawyers (added to Category:Lawyers by ethnicity) and am populating it. (changed opinion; see below).

  I don't think of it as non-defining and it has helped significantly in diffusing Category:American Jews. Omnis Scientia (talk) 07:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Marcocapelle, the thing with these Cfd (and I've seen a few related to Jewish people in general where most decide they are NOT defining) is that we are deciding whether or not Jewish Americans are defining. I would say they very much are. And in case of Jewish Americans, unlike Jewish Britons for example, there are significant numbers to warrant categories like this one IF there is a precedence of categorization by ethnicities in an occupation which, in this case, there is (Category:American lawyers by ethnic or national origin). Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  This comment entirely misses the intersection part in WP:EGRS/I. Of course American Jewish/Jewish American identity is defining for many people, and the category to reflect that is Category:American Jews. Place Clichy (talk) 08:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Place Clichy, again, you can apply this argument to any other ethnic group in the States, and there are other categories of Category:American lawyers which could be against WP:EGRS.

  In the event this category is NOT kept, it should be merged with Category:Jewish lawyers as well. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Dual merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Dual merge (rather than splitting, and maybe that was the original intent). Jewish American lawyers practice the same law as other lawyers. While there are a number of American lawyers who are Jewish, and the Jewish American lawyer may be a racist cliché in itself, I don't believe that someone should be put in such a category if their professional practice does not deal with Jewish topics in a defining fashion. I believe that for law professionals active on Jewish legal topics such as civil rights, Category:American Jewish anti-racism activists or Category:Jewish American community activists may be better locations. Place Clichy (talk) 08:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Place Clichy, I don't agree in part because being a civil rights lawyer does not mean being an activist. And I don't agree with they "practice the same law as other lawyers" arguement because you can say that about any profession and category.

  I'm very much in favor of keeping since there is precedence for dividing lawyers by ethnicity (non-American AND American). Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:16, 21 December 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.

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 16:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Jewish American inventors to Category:American inventors and Category:American Jews

Nominator's rationale: non-defining intersection per WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 16:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Split per nom. I would add Category:African-American inventors and Category:Alaska Native inventors and scientists too. Don't see the point of the Category:American inventors being divided by ethnicity. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If kept, I think that this category should be broadened to just Category:Jewish inventors. (Effectively, my rule of thumb for nominating was whether there was a parent Jewish OCCUPATION category that wasn't diffused by nationality.) Mason (talk) 20:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Dual merge per nom. Place Clichy (talk) 15:17, 22 December 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.

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 and manual rename. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Photographic collections and books to Category:Photographic collections and Category:Books of photographs
• Edited for clarity: Propose purging books to Category:Books of photographs and renaming the remaining category to Category:Photographic collections

Nominator's rationale: Collections and books are rather different things, so I'm not sure why the category was created covering both. There's already Category:Books of photographs, so the category members that are books should probably be split and merged there. I'm not sure if Category:Photographic collections would be a clear title. I think museum and gallery collections is the intended meaning? Does anyone have a better alternative title? Paul_012 (talk) 13:44, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Manually move the content to Category:Books of photographs whenever appropriate. We do not need another category for the remnants per se. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • You mean, keep the current title and structure, with "books" under "collections and books", and leave the articles about museum collections under the parent? That would preclude inclusion under Category:Museum collections though. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:49, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Paul 012: I see what you mean, this is more like a rename proposal, from Category:Photographic collections and books to Category:Photographic collections, it is not a proposal for a new category at all. Then I have no objection. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:41, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've reworded the proposal as such. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:42, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:38, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, it is currently a confusing category title that could do with being renamed/recategorised. Sionk (talk) 18:26, 20 December 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.

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 16:52, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:People in Sámi history (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, all people have lived in history at some point of time, this is not a defining characteristic. A merge is not needed, the articles are already in more appropriate Sámi subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell this category was supposed to be about famous Sámi people in history, but if someone has managed to be added to Wikipedia, I think that is enough to say that they were famous Sámi people, so I agree that this category should be ditched. - Yupik (talk) 22:22, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Until the 20th-century, the Sami people were not treated equally with Norwegians, Swedes and Finns in Norway, Sweden and Denmark. They did not always regard themselwes to be the subjects of these countries, but maintained their own separate culture and history. If this category is deleted, it would make it very hard to find Sami people of history, since they have no other such category. One would have to go through each individual article one by one, to find Sami people active prior to the 20th-century. There are no century-category of Sami people before the 20th-century. You could argue that centiry categories should be created instead of having this big category, but the problem is that the articles would, I believe, be to few to justify creating century categories before the 20th-century. Nevertheless, it is relevant to be able to find Sami people from history, particularly since their history was indeed separate from the history of other people of these realms. In the same fashion as, for example, "Category:19th-century Native Americans" have their own category. The Sami should not be treated differently.--Aciram (talk) 23:27, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Then by all means create 19th-century and 18th-century categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:07, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Aciram for bringing up this valid point! Based on your argument, I have changed my mind to oppose this category being deleted. - Yupik (talk) 09:13, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not enough with creating century categories. Why? I mention it above: some of those categories would simply be too small, and yet there are still Sami people who played in important part in Sami history which we would not be able to find if this category is deleted.--Aciram (talk) 22:05, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete with no objection to creating 18th and 19th century cats, that would create treat the Sami the same as the Native American categories. - 03:40, 10 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RevelationDirect (talk • contribs)
• Delete per above. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:22, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, I created Category:17th-century Sámi people, Category:18th-century Sámi people and Category:19th-century Sámi people. Also note that Category:People in Sámi history appears to contain quite a few Sámi linguists who weren't Sámi themselves so if anything this category needs to be purged. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:25, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will you create the categories Category:14th-century Sámi people and Category:14th-century Sámi people just for Margareta (missionary), or will she dissapear in the sense that she will be very hard to find for people looking for notable people from Sami history? --Aciram (talk) 16:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• If there is another article about a 14th-century Sámi I will. In the current situation there is not much use of a category because there is no other article to navigate to when you are in Margareta (missionary). Note that categories are meant to navigate between related articles. If you are interested in a complete list, List of Sámi people and List of Sámi women do a much better job. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:45, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. There is no point in time where history stops and the present starts. Timeless categories such as Category:Sámi people and children categories by occupation, geography or group can have people from the past. Living people were also placed in this category (example). The argument that "If this category is deleted, it would make it very hard to find Sami people of history, since they have no other such category" is a cyclic argument, it does not demonstrate that there is such a concept as Sami people of history. A list article may be more efficient to underline the importance of some individual figures in Sámi history.Place Clichy (talk) 08:16, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment -- The Sami have been nomads, and to some extent still are, wandering between Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia. They thus do not fit easily into national categories. The question is how the parent container for them should be named. 17th 18th and 19th century categories already exist, into which the articles ought to be dispersed. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:52, 25 December 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.

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 16:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Magical girl characters in anime and manga to Category:Magical girl characters

Nominator's rationale: Case of clear WP:OVERLAPCAT given that being a "magical girl" generally implies anime or manga origin. If anything, the ones in the parent category should probably be removed as miscategorized. Simply being a woman who uses magical powers does not imply being part of the magical girl genre. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:58, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, if merged, the current parent categories of Category:Magical girl characters in anime and manga should probably added as additional parent categories to Category:Magical girl characters (which does not happen in a merge by default). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment While the magical girl trope is defined as coming from/originating in Japanese media isn't it possible that other animation that is heavily anime-influenced could feature this character type?★Trekker (talk) 16:16, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It already has. The W.I.T.C.H. comic book series (2001-2012) and its animated adaptation, and the Winx Club animated series (2004-2019) are Italian versions of the magical girl concept. Dimadick (talk) 20:17, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • That is true.★Trekker (talk) 22:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

      I'm not saying there are zero exceptions to the rule, but it feels like an overlap to have a separate category for characters specifically from anime and manga. There just aren't so many non anime/manga characters this is necessary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:26, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster^talk 12:46, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:31, 20 December 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.

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:Television shows set in Wales. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:56, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Television shows set in Wales by city (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: There's only likely ever to be one category in this category (Wales' other major cities, Swansea and Newport are not centres of TV production to my knowledge) therefore this is an unnecessary category step. I suggest Category:Television shows set in Cardiff‎ is upmerged to the parent categories. Sionk (talk) 23:16, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• It would then probably be helpful to merge the siblings too. All of the United Kingdom would contain only 17 subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:16, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Leanining to oppose. This could be populated further. What about The Call Centre (Swansea) and Welcome to Wrexham? --woodensuperman 13:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Then the question is (and I do not know the answer) whether a Swansea category and a Wrexham category could be decently populated. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Yes, my point exactly, I can see only 2 series filmed in Swansea, which wouldn't be enough to justify a category Sionk (talk) 23:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  But it would allow placing of these articles in an established tree: Category:Culture in Swansea, etc. --woodensuperman 08:51, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The articles are already in established category trees. There's nothing to stop those two Swansea TV series being put in Category:Culture in Swansea anyway. SMALLCAT is designed to prevent categories containing only one or two items (which would make them difficult to find).Sionk (talk) 12:50, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SMALLCAT doesn't apply any more. It has been deprecated. --woodensuperman 13:38, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, I meant to say "Overcategorization guidance", per my opening remarks. Sionk (talk) 16:38, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster^talk 12:49, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is pointless. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Upmerge to parents per nom. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Upmerge to eliminate an unnecessary layer. This should probably also be done to the Scottish and Northern Irish siblings (2 items each). Peterkingiron (talk) 18:56, 25 December 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.

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 17:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Television series by JTBC Studios to Category:Television series by SLL

Nominator's rationale: Per C2D ♒️ 98TIGERIUS 🐯 08:41, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but Feel Free to Create Subcategory Since JTBC is the parent category and there are already two subcats for other subsidiaries, Zium and Drama House, just create a third subcategory. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Creating a subcat is likely wrong as both JTBC Studios and SLL are the same and it was rebranded to the latter per main article. ♒️ 98TIGERIUS 🐯 17:05, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for the clarification. The JTBC parent company article also reflects the rename so my iVote above is stricken. - RevelationDirect (talk) 19:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Alternate Rename to Category:Television series by SLL (South Korean company) per WP:C2D to match SLL (South Korean company). JTBC Studios is a redirect to that article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 19:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster^talk 21:50, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Film and television production company categories are never renamed. A show produced by company X was never produced by company B. That is just anachronistic and incorrect. What we do when a company is renamed, is make that the parent company of the former. Gonnym (talk) 12:27, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Gonnym can you provide a wikilink that supports your first sentence? ♒️ 98TIGERIUS 🐯 19:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Can I find a link for something that doesn't happen? Well, you can look for the 20th centuary fox category rename one. Gonnym (talk) 22:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  That would be Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 74#20th Century Fox films. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename "SLL" and "JTBC Studios" are effectively two names for the same entity - the category groups television series by the entity that produces them, not the name that entity went by. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:35, 27 December 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.

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 17:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Indo-European history to Category:History of the Indo-European languages

Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content (it is about the spread of the language family) and re-parent to Category:Indo-European languages. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:21, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Seeing how the category is populated now, it appears to mix two different things: a) articles that discuss the historical development of Indo-European languages (which is a good match for the proposed target) and b) articles that relate to the pre-historical geographical migrations of speakers of early Indo-European languages (which would be better assigned to a new cat Category:Indo-European migrations). –Austronesier (talk) 20:11, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Hm, with this limited amount of articles a split is not the most desirable option. Besides the migration is discussed in order to explain the spread of the language family. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:25, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Still the entire category lumps together two kinds of articles that are entirely unrelated to each other except for falling under the parent category Category:Indo-European languages. Have a look especially at Category:Indo-European language histories. These articles are about linguistic substance, i.e. how the phonology, grammar etc. of Indo-European languages have evolved from earlier attested or reconstructed stages. These "hard-core" linguistic topics are very remote from those that discuss the (pre-historical) spatial movements of peoples assumed to have spoken early Indo-European languages based on interdisciplinary interpretations of linguistic, archeaological and archaeogenetic data. –Austronesier (talk) 21:50, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster^talk 00:43, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The articles are not entirely about linguistics. The category is only sparsely populated and splitting will leave two SMALL CATS, which someone will misguidedly want to delete. I agree it is not a well bounded category. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The articles contained in the category are largely about migrations of people, rather than the spread of languages. Preserving this as a broad-concept category is preferable to splitting it into smallcats. And Marcocapelle, I would advise you not to not make substantial rearrangements to categories ahead of nominating them as you did to this one,[1] as that may hampers other editors' efforts to evaluate a category and participate in the discussion. Krakkos (talk) 12:01, 24 December 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.

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:Fiction about sexuality and age. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster^talk 22:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Sexuality and age in fiction to Category:Fiction about sexuality and age

Nominator's rationale: The category is proposed for renaming to match Category:Fiction about medicine and health and various precedents; I'm not handling this one through WP:CFDS as the resulting title is a bit odd. This is located within Category:Sexuality and age. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:17, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Containerize whether or not in combination with renaming. Articles should not directly be in Category:Sexuality and age in fiction or Category:Fiction about sexuality and age, without further specification it is a far too vague topic. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:52, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: comments on both the rename and the proposal on containerization would be appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster^talk 01:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose – There are many other categories that use the format "X in fiction", for example many of the subcats in the given example Category:Fiction about medicine and health. The current naming format also suits articles that discuss the use of those themes in fiction and not just instances of works using those themes. I think it just sounds less clunky too. MClay1 (talk) 12:09, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Support containerize and rename per Marcocapelle. I don't understand MClay1's opposition to the rename given that the goal is to ensure that the content is defining. I don't know of any examples of articles that discuss those themes, and think that they'd fit just as well in the category as renamed. Mason (talk) 23:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:17, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rename and containerise, per Marcocapelle, per nom. The target may be clunky, but it does at least clarify that it needs to be defining for the category members. Qwerfjkltalk 17:09, 28 December 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.

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. There is consensus to merge, and weak consensus for the nom's target. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:14, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:20th-century assassinated Asian politicians to Category:20th-century assassinated politicians

Nominator's rationale: I think we should just upmerge this category as there are only three categories total that contain nationality specific 20th-century assassinated politicians‎. Mason (talk) 00:14, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. I had forgotten about this project I started. My plan was to populate it directly with politicians not with nationalities, as opposed to Category:Assassinated politicians in Asia that is populated with subcategories of nationalities due to its extent. According to the PetScan analysis, the nominated category has potentially more than 300 entries. Sincerely,

Thinker78 (talk) 20:43, 25 November 2023 (UTC) Edited 23:11, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I would definitely recommend populating nationality categories (for the better populated countries only) rather than populating continent categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I concur. Nationality is helpful, much more so that continents. Mason (talk) 00:16, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I was doing that (20th-century assassinated Indian politicians, and Chinese) but there are only few of them. I think categorizing by continent is standard practice (cities in Asia, history of Asia, Asian cuisine, etc.). Given the large amount of individual pages in Category:Assassinated politicians in Asia, I think it would be also helpful to diffuse by intersection of at least 20t century assassinated politicians and assassinated politicians in Asia, although other diffusion schemes may be helpful as well. Btw, there is the Category:20th century in Asia. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 17:53, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Category:Assassinated politicians in Asia is pretty well diffused by nationalities. I don't see why we'd need to add an additional intersection by century with continent. I don't think that categorizing by continent before nationality is standard practice. I'm not sure your examples are super relevant because they don't include examples of people or death, which seem to be the key features here, rather than the continent. Mason (talk) 21:02, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Regardless, it's a lot of work. Although any "standard practice" starts one day with an initial practice that was not standard. Sincerely, Thinker78 (talk) 00:09, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Some countries like China and Japan have ancient histories. Diffusion can help navigate among at least two centuries, even in countries that were created in the 20th century. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 17:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge, even if it would be expanded with more nationalities it remains to be seen if we need continent categories on top. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:44, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I'd like to note that even though Thinker78 has added more Asian nationalities, I don't see the advantage of isolating them from the only other nationality category France. Mason (talk) 20:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't understand. Why do you mention France? (Category:20th-century assassinated French politicians)? Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 18:36, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Because it is a nationality category being treated differently from all the other nationality categories. Mason (talk) 20:49, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster^talk 23:28, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge but not as nom. Category:Assassinated politicians in Asia would be a better target. The present target is diffused by decades, which means that the nom's result would be ugly. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:45, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  So the problem is that Category:Assassinated politicians in Asia is supposed to be countries, rather than nationalities. So it would make an even bigger mess. The goal of the merge was to keep the nationalities in the 20th-century together, not further apart. Mason (talk) 21:23, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I tried to tidy up the category by bundling all the decades together, 20th-century assassinated politicians by decade‎, which I think is helpful if we must keep all the categories diffused by decade, personally I'd prefer we diffuse by nationality rather than decade. Mason (talk) 21:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm looking at the category I made, and I don't love it. I'm going to empty it and delete it. Mason (talk) 20:30, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:12, 20 December 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.

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 nom. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 17:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Fictional characters with spirit possession or body swapping abilities to Category:Fictional characters with body or mind control abilities

Nominator's rationale: merge, the two categories coincide apart from Category:Fictional hypnotists and indoctrinators (which is not part of the nomination). Marcocapelle (talk) 20:33, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge both with Category:Fictional psychics. It's another WP:NONDEF situation. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I am not against that either. I will tag the target too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merging either category into Category:Fictional psychics. Mind control is a distinct type of (psychic) power, it's not the exact same thing as telepathy, and it's certainly very different from telekinesis. AHI-3000 (talk) 09:01, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge I'm not convinced that this is a "psychic" ability, but this is definitely an unnecessary lower layer. Consider also placing members in Category:Fiction about spirit possession where applicable. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:49, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge both Category:Fictional hypnotists and indoctrinators and Category:Fictional characters with spirit possession or body swapping abilities into Category:Fictional characters with body or mind control abilities. AHI-3000 (talk) 08:56, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• A hypnotist is quite something different, isn't it? Marcocapelle (talk) 11:21, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  When it comes down to it, hypnosis in fiction is just one of many types of mind control. AHI-3000 (talk) 17:16, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • (response added after relisting) the difference between natural and supernatural forms of mind control seems too big to merge them together. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:41, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:46, 20 December 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.

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 rename to "African", weak consensus to replace "about" with "of".

• No consensus Category:Paintings of black people
• Rename Category:Murals about black people to Category:Murals of black people (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 20:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Paintings of black people to Category:Paintings of African people
• Propose renaming Category:Murals about black people to Category:Murals of African people

Nominator's rationale: rename and purge, "black" is too subjective a skin color (I learned that people of Indian descent may be included in "Black British") and likely to lead to original research. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, there are plenty of paintings of black models in Western Europe, such as France or the Netherlands. I doubt that these people identify as African, just as French and Dutch. Ymblanter (talk) 10:12, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably there must be paintings of black people that are not from African countries. It doesn't make sense to me to have, say, an article on a painting of Barack Obama in the Paintings of African people cat. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:20, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Black" is also specifically already used to identify many of the paintings affected, sometimes without any further identification of the subjects' ethnicity. Ex. Boy and Dog in a Johnnypump, Black Woman with Peonies, Portrait of a Black Man with a Sword, or the "Black is Beautiful" exhibit that popularized Wounded KNIL Soldier. Orchastrattor (talk) 04:48, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose rename per above, oppose purge per WP:BLUE. Orchastrattor (talk) 23:39, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do think "Murals of" makes more sense though, "Murals with" would also make more sense. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:22, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Paintings" got speedy renamed from 'about' to 'of' so yes but they just forgot about the subcats. Orchastrattor (talk) 05:03, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rename In general, African diaspora can be subsorted from African people if necessary. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:44, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Correct, there is already Category:Paintings of African-Americans. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:59, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Page was created as part of a larger diffusion on Category:Black people in art, children should not be renamed without renaming the entire tree. Orchastrattor (talk) 16:25, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principle, but two caveots. 1) I think an alternative name like people of African descent would require less purging; 2. Orchastrattor points out: we need to address the entire category tree. Mason (talk) 23:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question: How common is WP:SKYISBLUE in cat discussions? Populating "[subject] in [medium]" cats based on superficially obvious elements seems decently common already, not every painting is going to have reputable sources identifying every minute detail with no further analysis. Orchastrattor (talk) 04:42, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I asked User:Orchastrattor to revert the closing of this discussion, as being involved, not following the steps at WP:CfDClosings and being too early for a no consensus after just 7 days. If they don't self-revert, I or another editor will request to revert the closure e.g. at WP:AN/I. I am fine with the removal of this comment if the closing is removed. Place Clichy (talk) 09:34, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, but can someone please move "Murals about black people" to "Murals of black people" per parent-cats? That should be uncontroversial. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:39, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:18, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename Category:Murals about black people to Category:Murals of black people, following the parent cats Category:Murals of people and Category:Paintings of black people. Ham II (talk) 13:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as "black". Category:Murals of black people is better than the current name. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:29, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:44, 20 December 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.

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 19:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Works set in computers to Category:Works set in virtual worlds

Nominator's rationale: Should probably become a subcategory of Category:Virtual reality works, not Category:Computing. "In computers" can be vague, and refer to physically being inside a computer of some kind. This would, of course, imply the subcategories also get renamed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:17, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. The new name better fits the contents. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:52, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Use both Category:Works set in computers and Category:Works set in virtual worlds. Tron is in part set inside a physical computer... Much of the last half of the original film occurs inside the Mainframe computer and not inside a virtual environment. I believe there other works in the franchise with the same type of scenario. There is probably a case here for the existence of both categories and a need to double check that the articles are properly sorted. 4meter4 (talk)
• No objection to splitting per se, but if too little content remains in Category:Works set in computers it should be upmerged after all. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:50, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support These seem to be works about virtual realities. Dimadick (talk) 09:16, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:42, 20 December 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.

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 as nominated. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster^talk 17:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Jewish psychiatrists to Category:Psychiatrists and Category:Jewish physicians
• Propose merging Category:Jewish otolaryngologists to Category:Jewish physicians and Category:Otolaryngologists
• Propose merging Category:Jewish dermatologists to Category:Dermatologists and Category:Jewish physicians
• If kept (Propose renaming Category:Jewish physicians by speciality to Category:Jewish physicians by specialty)

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between ethnicity/religion and medical specialization. per WP:EGRS/I Mason (talk) 15:29, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom, trivial intersections. Jewish ears and larynges are no different than Goy ones. Place Clichy (talk) 23:17, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:42, 21 December 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.

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:Sinhala language. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster^talk 17:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Sinhala-language culture to Category:Sinhala language

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Unhelpful for navigation to only have one category in here Mason (talk) 14:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I moved Category:Sinhala-language mass media from Category:Sinhala language to Category:Sinhala-language culture, so there are now 2 categories. I'm neutral on the need to have this layer. Place Clichy (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:48, 21 December 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.

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 both as nominated. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster^talk 17:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Reconstructionist Jews by nationality to Category:Reconstructionist Jews
• Propose merging Category:Humanistic Jews by nationality to Category:Humanistic Jews

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Not helpful for navigation to only have two categories in here Mason (talk) 14:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:33, 21 December 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.

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 18:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Papua New Guinea national football team matches (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT with no chance of being increased Joseph2302 (talk) 12:20, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support It has not been proven that this team needs any subcategories. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:36, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 18:40, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Upmerge into Category:Papua New Guinea national football team and then delete. GiantSnowman 18:42, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment If upmerged, it should be to Category:Papua New Guinea national soccer team following recent RM. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 13:28, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete because the only member of the category (2016 OFC Nations Cup final) is not a Papua New Guinea national soccer team. HouseBlaster^talk 20:10, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:24, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Standard for every national team's significant matches to have their own category. I would prefer changing the category's name to Papua New Guinea national soccer team matches per its main category. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 17:23, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:57, 20 December 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.

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:Non-free video samples. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster^talk 17:42, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Non-free animated images to Category:Non-free video samples

Nominator's rationale: Redundant to category that is populated by {{Non-free video sample}}. Contents are a gameplay animation (File:Door door ani.gif), four samples from video works, and a file that is at FfD. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:54, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:49, 20 December 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.

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 18:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Anti-racism in the Arab world (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, the large amount of content is about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, not about anti-racism broadly, not about the Arab world per se. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:58, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom Mason (talk) 23:13, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The objection that there isn't enough content or that too much is Palestinian is specious. The lack of content is a suggestion that the categories should be added to. Racism in the Arab world and opposition to it is notable. The lack of attention to Arab anti-racist movements is a reflection of Wikipedia's Eurocentrism, anti-Arabism, and erasure of Black Arabs and other racialized Arabs. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 08:04, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• See answer in discussion above. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:43, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The discussion above is #Category:Arab anti-racism activists.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Marcocapelle and my reasoning at #Category:Arab anti-racism activists. The trouble with this category name is that it confuses a geographic area (the "Arab world", in which not all inhabitants self-identify as Arabs) and an ethnicity. That's a problem when the topic is anti-racism. It is safer, more convenient and in fact more precise to consider these topics by country and containerize categories through pre-existing regional category schemes such as Middle East. Also, this would have the benefit of avoiding unsolvable battles about e.g. whether Israel is in the Arab world. Place Clichy (talk) 04:15, 22 December 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.

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) HouseBlaster^talk 18:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Arab anti-racism activists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, only contains one article (which does not mention anti-racism activism) and one subcategory (which is already in Category:Middle Eastern anti-racism activists). Marcocapelle (talk) 10:06, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom Mason (talk) 23:13, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The objection that there isn't enough content is specious. The lack of content is a suggestion that the categories should be added to. Racism in the Arab world and opposition to it is notable. The lack of attention to Arab anti-racist movements is a reflection of Wikipedia's Eurocentrism, anti-Arabism, and erasure of Black Arabs and other racialized Arabs. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 08:03, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have added mention of Ksiksi's anti-racist activism and her role in passing pioneering anti-racism legislation in Tunisia. Why an article on Tunisia's first Black MP didn't already mention it, I don't know. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 09:20, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Meanwhile someone purged the one article, which makes it even less necessary to keep the category. Surely en.wp is biased in coverage, but you can't blame categories for it. Categories merely follow what happens in article space. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:41, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I created categories for Tunisian anti-racism and anti-racists. There should be more content about Arab anti-racism and there are the sources to do it. I don't think the fact that these categories are now currently parent categories is a good reason to eliminate them. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 09:10, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Incorrect juxtapostion of nationality and ethnicity; members of the subcategories currently here (which are based on nationality and type of activism) are not necessarily Arabs. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:15, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:42, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. That notion would only be useful if there was a specific Arab anti-racism. I don't think there is such a thing, it's just anti-racism. In fact the suggestion that there would be a specific Arab anti-racism is racist in itself. Also, the stupidity of adding Category:Moroccan anti-racism activists and Category:Tunisian anti-racism activists to the Arab anti-racist category is that, in fact, they could or should include Berbers and members of other minorities fighting against discrimination from the Arab majority in these countries. So let's better stick to geography-based container categories. Place Clichy (talk) 03:58, 22 December 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.

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) HouseBlaster^talk 18:00, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Han Chinese people (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Fictional Han people (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, if populated it would have more than 90% overlap with Category:Chinese people. Fortunately it has not been substantially populated yet. Note that subCategory:Subgroups of the Han Chinese is already directly under Category:Han Chinese as well, so there is no need to merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:06, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep we should distinguish between Chinese nationals and ethnic Chinese and Chinese speakers. There are many ethnic Chinese not in China with articles, and many non-Han in China with articles. "Chinese people" is a category that is ambiguously named, it should state it is for Chinese nationals, instead of "Chinese people", which can refer to those of Han ethnicity, Han ancestry, Sinophones, writers of Chinese languages, genetic groupings, etc. (Same problem with "French people", "German people", etc, where the same term refers to languages, nationals, ethnicities) -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 07:06, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Unless specified otherwise we mean people who have been living in China (or France or Germany for that matter) beyond being an expatriate. Distinguishing between Chinese nationals and ethnic (Han?) Chinese and Chinese speakers leads to a ridiculous amount of overlap. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:35, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. The distinction isn't helpful. Mason (talk) 03:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The parent category exists for many years but has not catched up, presumably because it is indistinguishable from Category:Chinese people. Child Category:Subgroups of the Han Chinese is already in parent Category:Han Chinese, itself in Category:Ethnic groups in China. Place Clichy (talk) 04:39, 22 December 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.

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. Create a new tree instead. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Spies by nationality to Category:Spies by country

Nominator's rationale: 寒吉 (talk) 11:31, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose, while you could well argue that spies ought to be categorized by country that they are spying for, that is currently not the case. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I think we could just create Category:Spies by country and fill it up with subcategories about "Spies for X country". AHI-3000 (talk) 19:08, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • That is a better plan. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:39, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:35, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Create a new tree as proposed by AHI-3000. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:03, 20 December 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.

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 18:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Cyber Security by country to Category:Computer security by country

Nominator's rationale: To match the parent (the three children of this one should have the same change) Fram (talk) 16:51, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom. Makes it consistent. Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 17:54, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, this is an opposite rename direction in comparison with this discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:30, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Alt rename to Category:Cybersecurity by country per the other mentioned discussion. Category:Computer security by country should be merged with it as a duplicate category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:02, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:Computer security by country. This matches Category:Computer security, and has correct capitalization and spelling. (Cybersecurity is one word.) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:48, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:31, 20 December 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.

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 merge, but it should be renamed to Category:Works set on the Moon. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Works set on the moon to Category:Fiction set on the Moon

Nominator's rationale: Duplicative in scope, contains only subcategories by medium. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:41, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose But rename the latter Category:Fiction about the Moon and make it a subcategory of Category:Works about the Moon. They are not duplicative, this is just a naming issue. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:47, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, setting is presumably only relevant for fiction. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:56, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:09, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per zxcvbnm and agree, but definitely uppercase Moon per proper name and Wikipedia style. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:29, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The outcome of Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_December_19#Category:Works_by_setting will affect this CfD. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:36, 20 December 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.

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/delete. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:41, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Musicals set on fictional planets to Category:Musicals set in outer space and Category:Works set on fictional planets
• Propose merging Category:Musicals set on the moon to Category:Musicals set in outer space and Category:Works set on the moon
• Propose deleting Category:Plays set on the moon (no other members)

Nominator's rationale: Merge small categories without prejudice to re-creating if more members are found. – Fayenatic London 11:49, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• See also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 November 14#Category:Musicals set on fictional moons.
• Merge/delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:40, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose moving Category:Musicals set on fictional planets to Category:Musicals set in outer space. Outer space is outside of a planet, and not on a planet. A fictional planet is not an outer space setting.4meter4 (talk) 14:41, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose moving Category:Musicals set on the moon to Category:Musicals set in outer space. Not all works set on the moon are envisioned as an outer space setting, but are more of a planet type setting (the moon as a colony and with an atmosphere). Outer space refers to things set in the space in-between planetary objects. These category changes create inaccuracies. 4meter4 (talk) 14:44, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Unsurprisingly, the theatrical play The Woman in the Moon (1593) is about a woman exiled to the Earth's Moon. There may be more depictions of the Moon in plays, since it is a main setting for the stories about the space-travels of Baron Munchausen. Dimadick (talk) 12:41, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Category:Astronomical objects is a subcategory of Category:Outer space and likewise fiction on moon and planets can be regarded as part of fiction in outer space. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:50, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:12, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:16, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/delete per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:13, 20 December 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.

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 Category:Massacres committed by anarchists, no consensus about Category:Anarchist terrorism. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Massacres committed by anarchists to Category:History of anarchism

Nominator's rationale: I'm not convinced that this intersection is defining/ok. I don't see any other categories like this, where the murder is defined by the political orientation of the killer. All the other examples in that category is based on specific organzations. Mason (talk) 06:28, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move/rename to Category:Anarchist terrorism. AHI-3000 (talk) 21:21, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your rename doesn't really address the core issue of violence by political orientation. Are there other categories like the one you've proposed? Mason (talk) 21:43, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You must not be aware of Category:Terrorism by political orientation. Category:Left-wing terrorism would certainly be used as a supercategory for Category:Anarchist terrorism.

AHI-3000 (talk) 03:27, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not all anarchists are left wing though. (t · c) buidhe 04:37, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most anarchists are leftist. Especially in the context of militant anarchism. AHI-3000 (talk) 05:13, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• If not merged then the name Category:Anarchist terrorism covers the content of the category better. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:30, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• If merged, also merge to Category:Terrorism by political orientation. I wasn't aware of this category either. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:08, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Notified the anarchism noticeboard, which wasn't tagged. czar 13:46, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Agreed with the nom. This is a problem with the entire Category:Terrorism by political orientation category unless the events can be made to shown that political orientation was a "defining" motivation in the event (and not just a trait of the actor). See {{Terrorism category definition}}. The articles in this category, if need be, are already covered in other subcategories related to the history of anarchism. czar 13:46, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Does anyone else find it odd that many articles in this list are about bombings? I wouldn't expect bombings to be described as massacres. You can massacre people with guns or swords or so on, but if you mass-kill people with a bomb, that's just... a bombing. It's not completely impossible (eg I can find hits for "Air India massacre" and "Lockerbie massacre" on google), but it's certainly not common, and it seems to me that the uses I turned up weren't examples of defining these bombings as massacres so much as a rhetorical twist to emphasize the horror for readers. Our own article on massacres appears to agree with me. -- asilvering (talk) 14:15, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I think the category was created in good faith, but to be honest, only one of the events listed really meets the classical definition of a massacre, that being the Eichenfeld massacre. The others are largely bombings, one case of a mass execution of prisoners of war and one is a mass murderer. These were all certainly awful, but don't qualify as "massacres" (i.e. mass killings of civilians by an armed group) in the same way Eichenfeld clearly does. I'd consider keeping this category if more clear-cut examples can be presented that justifies the category's existence. --Grnrchst (talk) 20:37, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:15, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I note that meanwhile Category:Anarchist terrorism has been created as a duplicate of the nominated category. Presumably, if there is consensus to delete the nominated category, its duplicate should be deleted too. And if kept they should be merged back. This is really a procedural mess. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:38, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a procedural matter I have tagged Category:Anarchist terrorism for merger to Category:History of anarchism subject to consensus in this discussion. – Fayenatic London 15:19, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Merge Category:Massacres committed by anarchists into Category:Anarchist terrorism. This would be the most logical option for a merging target IMO, not Category:History of anarchism. AHI-3000 (talk) 05:18, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose I disagree that the category "anarchist terrorism" should be deleted/merged. Anarchist terrorism is an actual subject of scholarly interest,[2] I have a number of books on my shelf about it. But "massacres committed by anarchists" just are not.[3] Someone may have merged the content of one into the other, but these are not the same category. One has a reason to exist, the other doesn't. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:04, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Category:Anarchist terrorism should be covered in a separate discussion. The point remains that the topics in this category are already covered under child categories of the History of anarchism category so there is no need for merger. czar 04:54, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is consensus to delete or merge Category:Massacres committed by anarchists, but not for Category:Anarchist terrorism.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Category:Anarchist terrorism should be considered separately. It shouldn't have been bundled with this nom as there is agreement that it is not a "duplicate" of the nominated category. czar 15:37, 22 December 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.

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 18:37, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Deaths by firearm in New York City to Category:Deaths by firearm in New York (state)
• Propose merging Category:Deaths by firearm in Queens, New York to Category:Deaths by firearm in New York (state)
• Propose merging Category:Deaths by firearm in Manhattan to Category:Deaths by firearm in New York (state)
• Propose merging Category:Deaths by firearm in Brooklyn to Category:Deaths by firearm in New York (state)
• Propose merging Category:Deaths by firearm in the Bronx to Category:Deaths by firearm in New York (state)
• Propose merging Category:Deaths by firearm in Staten Island to Category:Deaths by firearm in New York (state)

Nominator's rationale: Per trivial cat, we don't categorize deaths by place; Also per WP:OCLOCATION. In the usa, category is as specific as the state because the categories are very large. The primary category is cause of death (that is then diffused by country). Mason (talk) 00:46, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Deaths by firearm in New York City. We allow categorizations of certain types of deaths by place, and while NYC is big enough to justify its own subcategory within New York state, we don't need to diffuse any further. (There are 226 articles in the NYC tree; for comprison, Category:Deaths by firearm in Texas contains 227 articles, if we exclude everything from Category:Assassination of John F. Kennedy.) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:20, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NYC may be big, but I don't think that alone is reason to diffuse to city. Mason (talk) 18:48, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom (or else merge per LaundryPizza03). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep "we don't need to diffuse any further" According to whom and for what reason? Nearly all categories need further subcategories. Dimadick (talk) 20:19, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Manhattan (which I checked) is quite large enough to keep. I expect the rest are too. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:22, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per @LaundryPizza03's suggestion. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:04, 20 December 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.

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 18:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Suicides in New York City to Category:Suicides in New York (state)
• Propose merging Category:Drug-related suicides in New York City to Category:Drug-related suicides in New York (state)
• Propose merging Category:Suicides by hanging in New York City to Category:Suicides by hanging in New York (state)
• Propose merging Category:Murder–suicides in New York City to Category:Murder–suicides in New York (state)
• Propose merging Category:Suicides by firearm in New York City to Category:Suicides by firearm in New York (state)
• Propose renaming Category:Suicides by jumping in New York City to Category:Suicides by jumping in New York (state) (renaming to change the scope as there currently isn't a new york state version of the category)

Nominator's rationale: Per trivial cat, we don't categorize deaths by place; Also per WP:OCLOCATION. In the usa, category is as specific as the state because the categories are very large. The primary category is cause of death (that is then diffused by country). Mason (talk) 00:50, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep According to PetScan, there are 248 articles that are not in the 9/11-related subcategories. For comparison, there are 114 articles in the rest of the New York state tree. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:25, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But why keep new york city? as opposed to the larger state like we do for other suicide categories. Mason (talk) 18:47, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:09, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep "Per trivial cat, we don't categorize deaths by place" Yet you suggesting merging to another category which does just that. And I do not see any reason to merge city-level categories to a category covering an entire U.S. State. Dimadick (talk) 20:18, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep the two that I checked are well populated - well over 5 entries. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:24, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 13:03, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:12, 20 December 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.

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. There is consensus that the current category name is bad. and weak consensus that deletion (rather than renaming) is the solution. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Fictional self-sacrifices to Category:Fictional martyrs

Nominator's rationale: Real-life counterpart is Category:Martyrs. Contested WP:CFDS due to concerns that the martyr label is used mostly in a religious context, but that was contested as well due to concerns about definingness.

• Delete per User:Zxcvbnm unless someone comes up with sources that fictional sacrifices are really a thing. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:46, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:35, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:58, 20 December 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.

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 18:33, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Indo-Europeanists to Category:Indo-European studies scholars

Nominator's rationale: rename per article Indo-European studies. The term Indo-Europeanist is hardly ever used. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:42, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is "Indo-European studies scholars"? – Joe (talk) 07:08, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Indo-European studies definitely is. Do you have a better suggestion? Marcocapelle (talk) 11:46, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, "Indo-Europeanist", because it is used sometimes and I think that's better than coming up with our own term. – Joe (talk) 11:59, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Mild Support per nom. But I'm dubious this category should have as a sub the category (with a large tree below) for Category:Linguists of Indo-European languages, bringing some odd people under it - Ben Jonson and Samuel Johnson to name but two, who would never have been aware that anything was "Indo-European". Not to mention Varro. Johnbod (talk) 14:48, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:35, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. "Indo-Europeanist" is the WP:COMMONNAME and more WP:CONCISE. Marcocapelle, I suggest you take another look at the edits you made in late November to articles that were part of Category:Indo-Europeanists. Scholars such as Martin Litchfield West, Dean A. Miller, Stig Wikander, Donald J. Ward, Udo Strutynski, Calvert Watkins, Edgar C. Polomé, Georges Dumézil and Jaan Puhvel were removed by you from Category:Indo-Europeanists, despite all of them clearly being Indo-Europeanists. Krakkos (talk) 11:44, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I had applied WP:SUBCAT since e.g. Category:Germanic studies scholars was a subcategory, but will add these articles back now. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:59, 24 December 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.

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) HouseBlaster^talk 18:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Kentucky women writers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: A combination of people which are present in subcategories of Category:American women writers and Category:Writers from Kentucky. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:25, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Mason (talk) 14:29, 20 December 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.

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:Indonesian language. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster^talk 18:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Indonesian-speaking people by occupation to Category:Indonesian language

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:15, 20 December 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.

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:Indonesian language. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster^talk 18:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Indonesian-language culture to Category:Indonesian language

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This category doesn't help navigation with only one category in it. Mason (talk) 04:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:15, 20 December 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.

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:Canadian people by language. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster^talk 18:08, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Canadian people by first language to Category:Canadian people by language

Nominator's rationale: Neither child category indicates that their first language was that specific language Mason (talk) 03:46, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename and re-parent per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:31, 20 December 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.

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:Finnish people by language. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster^talk 18:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Finnish people by first language to Category:Finnish people by language

Nominator's rationale: Neither of the child categories indicate that the speakers first spoke Russian or Swedish. Mason (talk) 03:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename and re-parent per nom. The whole (small) tree of Category:People by first language may go. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 20 December 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.

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) HouseBlaster^talk 17:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:20th-century executions of Jewish people to Category:20th-century executions

Nominator's rationale: upmerge as this category doesn't help navigation Mason (talk) 01:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, sole subcategory is already in Category:People executed by Nazi Germany. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Just delete per LaundryPizza03, the subcategory is already down in the tree of Category:20th-century executions. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:28, 20 December 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.