Cannabis Sativa

thcscience_admin
< February 23
February 25 >

February 24[edit]

Category:Japanese diaspora in Latin America[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 11:58, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: At present it is not helpful for navigation with only one page in it. Upmerge for now Mason (talk) 22:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Court painters of the Kingdom of Sardinia[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: dual merge to Category:Court painters and Category:People from the Kingdom of Sardinia. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:30, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only person in here isn't mentioned as being a "Court painter", if kept, I think the category should be renamed to painters from the Kingdom of Sardinia Mason (talk) 21:41, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Ancient art on Alexander the Great[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Alexander the Great in art. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:31, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename to march the style of Art depicting people. I've broadened the category to not focus on the era of creation of the art, but I don't feel strongly about it. Mason (talk) 21:36, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also fine with that. Johnbod (talk) 18:29, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Australian indigenous rights activists[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 3#Category:Australian indigenous rights activists

Category:Armoured cars of the United States[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: MOS:TIES. The United States produces armored cars, not armoured ones. None of the pages in the category use the British spelling. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:54, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename, aligning with the article titles in this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:08, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Fictional female businesspeople[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Fictional businesspeople. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 11:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Fictional female businesspeople to Category:Fictional businesswomen
Nominator's rationale: Last time, this discussion ended without a clear consensus. I still think that this proposed new page name would be both shorter and also consistent with its real-life counterpart Category:Businesswomen.
Also, to address the bizarre semantic argument that "women = female humans"; while that might be true for real life, in the realm of speculative fiction being a "man" or "woman" doesn't necessarily mean that you're human; non-human humanoid characters are often treated as "people" like humans are. Fictional women can be female aliens, angels, demons, fairies, goddesses, monsters, vampires, etc. AHI-3000 (talk) 04:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given the category was only tagged yesterday, relisting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 19:58, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 20:49, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Assassinated journalists[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 3#Category:Assassinated journalists

Category:Z Holdings[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 3#Category:Z Holdings

Category:Scachs d'amor[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:33, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: this category is unhelpful for navigation. It contains only the poem AND the people who wrote the poem Mason (talk) 19:46, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, the articles are already interlinked directly. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:31, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is not an epic poem with a large cast of characters, or a source of numerous adaptations. How are we supposed to expand the category?Dimadick (talk) 18:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Kings of the Neo-Elamite Period[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:33, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation. There's no Category:Neo-Elamite Period category. Mason (talk) 19:44, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Religious concepts related with Adam and Eve[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:33, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining and unhelpful for navigation Mason (talk) 19:34, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom, and the category's name isn't idiomatic. Ham II (talk) 21:18, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, unclear distinction versus its parent category. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:36, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. I fail to see how is this distinct from its parent category. Dimadick (talk) 18:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:New Testament apocrypha related with Adam and Eve[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge as nominated. No prejudice against nominating any of the merge targets for renaming. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:34, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge. Overcategorization, there's really no need for this much diffusion. Mason (talk) 19:30, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom Small categories with little to no scope for expansion. Dimadick (talk) 18:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:University of Melbourne alumni sportspeople[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge/delete as nominated. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:35, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection Mason (talk) 19:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Executed journalists[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:35, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This category only has one person in it. (Please populate categories with more than one person.) Mason (talk) 19:18, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I have added 15 people to the category, and I am sure many more can be found. No Swan So Fine (talk) 22:32, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep for the reasons cited above AHI-3000 (talk) 04:44, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep now that the cat is populated --Lenticel (talk) 02:53, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Plenty of scope for expansion, thanks to the lack of freedom of the press throughout much of recent history. Dimadick (talk) 18:39, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Now that the category has been populated, the rationale for deletion doesn't even apply anymore, not that I think it was legit in the first place. Anyways, we should have this closed as a solidly unanimous "Keep" vote. AHI-3000 (talk) 22:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:University of Melbourne women[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: manually merge where applicable. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 12:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not a notable intersection - as far as I can tell, there is no other university for which we have an "X University women" category. StAnselm (talk) 17:25, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, but we should check to confirm that folks are all in University of Melbourne people categories. Mason (talk) 21:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They should be - either as alumni or staff. I clicked on Gillian Armstrong somewhat randomly, and she wasn't in any other University of Melbourne category, but in fact there was nothing in the article supporting a connection with the university. StAnselm (talk) 22:17, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for consistency. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I created this category - it was part of an event where women wiki editors got together and wrote articles about significant women to address the gender imbalance, as there are a lot more articles about men and than women on Wikipedia...so it would be poetic if male editors removed it! The category highlights those women from Melb uni who have gone on to achieve things. I think being a woman is notable, in the context of gender studies and history. Deathlibrarian (talk) 00:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: I think it is worth pointing out that I am a female wikipedian. @Deathlibrarian, if you're going to point out gender imbalances, it's good to not make assumptions. I think that this category does not meet the criteria for defining under EGRS. It may be interesting for a list, but this is not how categories work. Mason (talk) 00:30, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I do appreciate that information, but gender of the *nominator* aside, about 90% of Wiki editors are in fact men (including me), so it's likely it will be men voting to remove it... which is my point. However, if it's strictly against the rules for establishing categories, so be it. Personally I think it's a positive, helpful category that can help the user.Deathlibrarian (talk) 00:57, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This need a manual merger. It is not clear whether the category covers staff members, alumni, patrons of the university, etc. Dimadick (talk) 18:43, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Jewellery collectors[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining. Most of these people are just wealthy art collectors Mason (talk) 16:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The nom is not even correct - some are also collectors of other art, but most aren't (Ellen Barkin, Wallis Simpson etc). Shouldn't you be proposing a merge if that were true anyway? Most are not categorized as art collectors. But keep anyway. It's a distinct thing. Obviously money is needed. Johnbod (talk) 19:55, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (when I updated the nom to state that most were just wealth, I accidentally overwrote the above nom). My point still stands that these people are defined by their jewelry collecting. I added all the art collectors to their respective FOO art collectors, so there was no need to merge.Mason (talk) 21:56, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That "that these people are defined by their jewelry collecting" (Wallis Simpson?) rather contradicts your nom rationale, no? Johnbod (talk) 15:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for pointing out my typo. What I meant (and hope was clear from context) was that these people are NOT defined by their jewelry collecting.Mason (talk) 17:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I created this category to collate people who had devoted their lives to amassing significant collections of jewellery. Being wealthy is a prerequisite. No Swan So Fine (talk) 22:12, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, trivial characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:55, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I think an interesting cateogory, of note to those who are studying the field. Deathlibrarian (talk) 00:09, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Provided that the articles cover the topic, this could be a useful category. Dimadick (talk) 18:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Quotation collectors[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Compilers of works of quotations. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining Mason (talk) 16:16, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but rename to "Compilers of works of quotations" It is pretty much all Athenaeus, Diogenes Laertius, Myro of Rhodes and Quote Investigator are known for, and the entire source of their notability. Others could no doubt be added. Johnbod (talk) 20:02, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per Johnbod, clearer name for what it is intended for. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per Johnbod. These are not collectors, they just wrote books and reference works about quotations. Dimadick (talk) 18:50, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Irish Queen's Counsel[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 23:36, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: C2C NSH001 (talk) 15:18, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't this be redirected, instead? Mason (talk) 16:15, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No - see the head cat. Many in fact only were KC; we just move the whole tree when QCs become KCs, very sensibly. Johnbod (talk) 20:09, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom, as we did in 2022 with the main cat, where the note says: "The category King's Counsel is for barristers appointed Queen's or King's Counsel (QC or KC), and other individuals appointed QC or KC honoris causa,...". This lot were just forgotten. Johnbod (talk) 20:11, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment. I only came here because I wanted to add the KC cat to Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh. However, looking at the header cat, there are another 18 subcats like this that should probably also be nominated (plus there were some really silly subcats which I've now removed). --NSH001 (talk) 14:00, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Works by date[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 2#Category:Works by date

Category:Kings of the Kingdom of Ireland[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I've never seen any source categorize English monarchs this way. They are all already in Category:16th-century Irish monarchs or Category:17th-century Irish monarchs, etc. Some of them are queens not kings. Over-categorization. DrKay (talk) 11:28, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yup - even Lady Jane Grey is in there. Johnbod (talk) 20:24, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's redundant and simply not comprehensive (there were multiple female monarchs at different points, as it was pointed out). We already have categories that cover Irish monarchs without alluding to their genders (already linked above by the nominator). Format wise it's also inconsistent (note that we don't have Category:Kings of the Kingdom of England, Category, Category:Kings of the Kingdom of Scotland, Category:Kings of the Kingdom of Sweden, etc.; and we don't need to have them when comprehensive categories covering all the respective monarchs exist). Keivan.fTalk 17:00, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Johnbod (talk) 20:24, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, entirely overlaps with English/British monarchs in the same period. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:00, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete They are all also English monarchs, so this is likely a fork. Векочел (talk) 15:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Indian Prime Minister speeches[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. The subcategory is already in Category:Speeches by politicians so a merge is not needed. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:08, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom Mason (talk) 00:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Speeches in the Parliament of South Africa[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OVERLAPCAT, all articles are already in Category:South Africa presidential speeches. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:56, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
support per nom Mason (talk) 16:14, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:20th-century Dutch anatomists[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's no need to diffuse anatomists by nationality and century. If kept, then I think we should rename the categories to X-century anatomists Mason (talk) 04:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, these categories are reasonably well populated and I do not see another reason why merging would be beneficial. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:15, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Who says that there is no need? Dimadick (talk) 12:04, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment. I've created parent categories and you all are right that clearly there's benefit for diffusion by century. FOOth-century anatomists Mason (talk) 21:59, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:16th-century German chemists[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one person in each category, which isn't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 04:07, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. I think that Paul Luther was a pharmacist rather than a chemist. It is difficult to put modern labels on people of this period anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:20, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment "physician, medical chemist, and alchemist." He sounds like an apothecary to me, since he created his own drugs. Dimadick (talk) 18:55, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Vietnamese-language newspapers published in Texas[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one newspaper in here, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason (talk) 04:03, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: I think there used to be a few more articles in this category, but since that's no longer the case, merging seems reasonable to me. The lone remaining article has already just been added to one parent category, Category:Vietnamese-language media in Texas. Minh Nguyễn 💬 04:26, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Yale Bulldogs rugby[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Yale Bulldogs. Discussion of the categorization of Yale Rugby can take place at Talk:Yale Rugby. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one page in category. Let'srun (talk) 04:00, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Rollins Tars baseball seasons[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category lacks subjects. Upmerge to Rollins Tars baseball. Let'srun (talk) 03:21, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:History of medicine in Iran[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one page in here, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason (talk) 02:14, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Flint (rock)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 2#Category:Flint (rock)

Category:Internet Archive collectors[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Digital archivists. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Based on the contents, there are all people connected with the internet archive. They're not really collectors... Mason (talk) 00:14, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Collectors of Shaker artifacts[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining (and small category). The two people in here, are both currators, hence the merge target Mason (talk) 00:12, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Handbag collectors[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining category for any of the three people in here. Mason (talk) 00:11, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:NONDEF. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I can see the need for a category which covers people who collect fashion items and related works, but these people are not known for their collections. Dimadick (talk) 18:59, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Electrosurgery[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Only two pages in here, the technique and the guy who invented the technique. Mason (talk) 00:08, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Fictional pediatric surgeons[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge. There's only one page in here, which is really not enough to support a category at the intersection of two specializations. Mason (talk) 00:02, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Fictional cardiothoracic surgeons[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Fictional cardiac surgeons. No prejudice against speedy renomination for merging. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category:cardiothoracic surgeons doesn't exist as a category. And for the most part, these fictional surgeons are thought of a heart surgeons. I'm also ok with just merging to fictional surgeons. Mason (talk) 00:01, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:Fictional surgeons, this level of specificity is not necessary outside of real life. In fiction, it's less important what type of surgeon they are. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:25, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. We do not need to upmerge the category per se, since these are characters of hospital drama series (but I am also not strongly against merging). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:56, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Cardiothoracic surgery is the parent field for "cardiac surgery" and "thoracic surgery". With the exception of a few countries, most of the relevant surgeons "further sub-specialize" into treating specific types of diseases. Dimadick (talk) 19:20, 26 February 2024 (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.
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_February_24

Leave a Reply