Edge Rewrite
everything Source code View original
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a2360b7ce808f557

Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All current discussions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts

Speedy renaming and merging

[edit]

Remember to tag the category page with: {{subst:cfr-speedy|New name}}

New requests

[edit]


Opposed requests

[edit]
Questions To clear things up, I only created the Category:Shopping malls by architect cat; User:Asiess835 did the developer one. And back then, when I helped them make the additional categories for the developer one, I didn't realize malls developed or designed by the companies would move outside of just the U.S. Should it be categorized as Category:Shopping malls by country or just put both the US and Canada cats on them, or should any categories about malls developed or designed by those firms should have their own separate cats instead of being grouped in one (e.g. Category:Shopping malls developed by The Mills Corporation -> Split into Category:Shopping malls in Canada developed by The Mills Corporation for Vaughan Mills and Category:Shopping malls in the United States developed by The Mills Corporation for Potomac Mills)? Aspifi (talk) 21:08, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]


On hold pending other discussion
[edit]


Moved to full discussion
[edit]


Current discussions

[edit]
Shortcut

July 30

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:Netherlands rock

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Maybe could be speedied, but the parents are Rock music by country and Music of the Netherlands, and the core category is Rock music in the Netherlands. It should be either named Rock music of the Netherlands or Dutch rock music. SMasonGarrison 13:05, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Category:Dutch rock music? Clear consensus for a rename.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:36, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish colonial architecture

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, the parent category and one sibling have "c" instead of "C", supposedly they all should have "c". It is not a case of WP:C2C, perhaps it is WP:C2A. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:05, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I would support the use of lower case in these examples relating to historic buildings, although "Spanish Colonial" does exist as a style.--Thoughtfortheday (talk) 13:14, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Portal-Class Country music pages

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Portal:Country music, the prime eligible page to belong to the first category, was deleted in 2019 per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Country music. UnitedStatesian created this category in 2021, stating that they were recreating it, but I can't trace anything that ever populated it. – Fayenatic London 09:32, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

19th century in Afghanistan

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, 6 categories for 3 articles, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:31, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge I have come to realize my attempt to create an intersection between country level entity and year of establishment to hold every article in any given year was misguided. I do not seem to have created this category, but did in the same time period create several other similar categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:59, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Nominator's rationale: manually merge, these aren't articles about terminology as a subject, they rather are articles about subjects in canon law. Move articles to the root category if they aren't already somewhere else in the Canon law of the Catholic Church tree, and uncontainerize the parent category. There is one exception, article List of Catholic canon law legal abbreviations, which should be moved to Category:Catholic terminology too. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:23, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ballets set during the Third Servile War

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with only one entry, unlikely to expand. PatGallacher (talk) 01:28, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]



July 29

[edit]

Category:Alt-right politicians in Canada

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: 2 of the people in this category (Southern and Goldy) are clearly alt-right but are political commentators, not politicians. Goldy did attempt and fail to run for mayor so I suppose she could count but that is only 1 article, too small for such a specific subcategory. The other one, Fromm, is not described as alt-right, which is a specific 2010s movement and not synonymous with far right; he is straightforwardly a white supremacist. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:33, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now, per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:15, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete at best, and that is debatable, we have 1 article that fits which is too narrow. Not every unsuccessful candidate for mayor needs to be categorized by that. At least at the local politics level, I think we should limit politician categories to those actually elected. Categroies are supposed to be by defining traits, not every detail of a subjects life.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:57, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American alt-right politicians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Not one of the 3 people in this category is described as alt-right in their articles. Alt-right refers to a specific 2010s movement and is not synonymous with far right. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:30, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Christian terminology stubs

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: manually merge, redundant stub category, most articles are already in another Christianity stub category. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:25, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Kashmiri atheists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The other categories for athiests by ethnicity have more coverage. Jewish atheism has a lot of coverage. Arab atheism doesn't have that much coverage, and I'm fine with its deletion, but it does cover more people. HerrHeulsuse (talk) 16:38, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Transgender villains

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category violates WP:OCEGRS. The creator seems to have a long history of making trivial intersection categories, this may need some sort of attention. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:59, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Transgender characters in video games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category violates WP:OCEGRS. The creator seems to have a long history of making trivial intersection categories, this may need some sort of attention. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:56, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom, but please nominate sibling categories (e.g. Category:Bisexual characters in video games) too. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:37, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. While the above "villains" category is too small and specific, this one is perfectly acceptable. The representation of transgenderism in different types of media is a typical study object in sociology and other science branches, and also a typical thing that gets reported upon. Something like the very broad "The SAGE Encyclopedia of Trans Studies" repeatedly refers to appearances in video games (e.g. in Tell Me Why (video game), but also Assassins Creed and Persona). Here, in "Crime, Punishment, and Video Games", is a lengthy discussion about the depiction of transgerder people in video games, and this book, "Queerness in Play" has a lot more detail about it, with e.g. a table of 97 transgender characters in 91 games, and discussion about the shifts in number and importance of characters over the years. Just a few of the many examples about this. This is an important topic, and very, very clearly a defining characteristic about these characters, and merging thiq to the more general categories is not herlpful or appropriate at all. Fram (talk) 08:09, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Retro TV

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This categories feels unnecessary as the articles with this category are only about Retro TV, no original shows, or other things. OWaunTon (talk) 12:34, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Publications

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Continuation of [2], see there for an explanation of the problems with "publication" as a categorization scheme. In summary, publication has multiple different definitions which different categories are using inconsistently, such as including books in some but excluding in others, problematic as there are different categorization considerations for book and periodical literature, as referring to the business of publishing, or as a synonym for "mass media". Publication taken to be all inclusive of all types of media is redundant to the "mass media" category tree so that does not work either.

In this case, all of these categories are using publication to mean "periodical", so we should move it there. I did magazines for one because all of those were magazines. I also did one the opposite direction for books as everything in there is books. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:01, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No objection from me.----3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 10:08, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
When you inevitably rename them, do not continue linking them to Wikidata as most of the languages there refer specifically to *publications* and not *periodicals*. Create new items for them so we don't have to once again fix the mess on the Wikidata side or on other language Wikipedias. - Yupik (talk) 13:23, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, the previous batch needs to be decoupled from their Wikidata items and new wd items created. This is something you need to do each time you rename categories instead of leaving it to people on Wikidata and other language versions to fix. - Yupik (talk) 13:25, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

19th-century publications

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant and extremely underpopulated categories, where populating would result in thousands of redundant categories, already handled by a plethora of better subcategories in the 2nd tree. The first ones' scopes are periodicals established in that century. Same as the second. Also more accurate, as periodicals are not individual works like books where there is one single time but they exist over a range and so are defined by starting and cessation dates. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:35, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tonlé Sap

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Move per the main topic. Henrydat (talk) 07:41, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

16th-19th century in Angola

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, mostly isolated one- or two-articles categories, this is not helpful for navigation. A second merge target is not necessary, the articles are already in an exact year in Africa. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:01, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Crimes in Asia by month

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, isolated categories, this is not helpful for navigation. The merge needs to happen manually because the articles may already be in another subcategory of the targets. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:59, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]


July 28

[edit]

Category:Works about raw foodism

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains one article. Could not find any others. (Oinkers42) (talk) 19:05, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Big City Greens characters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains two articles. Should also be merged into Category:Disney Television Animation characters. (Oinkers42) (talk) 18:32, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Places in Hacienda de Mandaloyon

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, none of the articles provide more information about the hacienda than the header of the category page already does. This should rather be converted to an article. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:47, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, toby (t)(rw) 13:22, 21 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 17:27, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Attacks in the 1870s

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:54, 21 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 17:27, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Maltesian football club seasons by club

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The demonym for Malta is Maltese, not "Maltesian". Bearcat (talk) 15:44, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Yet another

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SHAREDNAME. The contents here are computer software or utility packages which, by the geekazoid conventions of software development, have been named "Yet Another X" and/or "Yasomething" -- but per longstanding consensus, we don't categorize topics by characteristics of their names. Bearcat (talk) 15:06, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete categorization by shared name. John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:28, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Categorized subjects are directly related—most are software or otherwise computing-related, in this case—and I daresay their names are essentially "defining" (though I am not completely sure of the meaning of that wikijargon); for example, yacc and YARV per se define those tools as a compiler-compiler and a Ruby virtual machine, respectively. That category was created primarily because those related articles were mostly scattered about, with nothing linking them like that, and such a linking was needed in the Yet another article (see the See also section, then compare with what we had before). For more, see this discussion on that article's talkpage. ～ bytekast [talk • cont • logs] 16:07, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SHAREDNAME, stating that we do not categorize topics by characteristics of their names, is an absolute rule and not an optional suggestion. Bearcat (talk) 16:08, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I know, and I was directly referencing that policy's page! I fully read it over before writing my reply. ～ bytekast [talk • cont • logs] 16:11, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I think you didn't even access the informational links I provided in the reply! You replied just so quickly. Hopefully other people will click on them and understand the full issue before deciding on anything. ～ bytekast [talk • cont • logs] 16:13, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It is a guideline, not even a policy, so no, this is far from an "absolute rule". Fram (talk) 08:01, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, guidelines can have exceptions and be re-evaluated if/when consensus shifts. RevelationDirect (talk) 22:20, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't you just described exactly what categories are? The Rolling Stones and Nirvana (band) articles aren't about rock bands, they are mere examples. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 11:00, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Agree that this is better presented in a list. --Bsherr (talk) 01:07, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bsherr What would you say (or do) then about the issue discussed in the article's talkpage and raised by Escape Orbit? That 25-year-old stub needs improvements and expansion, yet having a complete list of examples in it is apparently a bad idea! So what else shall be done with those namewise related but otherwise scattered (and soon category-orphaned) articles? No good list can be had, no category either, and the YA/Ya prefix pages are way too broad (the category is much better for that purpose)… Every solution I tried has failed! I have no idea what else to do about this, so I'll just leave it for the community to sort it out by yourselves. ～ bytekast [talk • cont • logs] 01:26, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If the consensus at the article is that an open-ended list would make the article too long or be disproportionate within a summary style, you could create a stand-alone list. --Bsherr (talk) 01:55, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I am not sure whether one person agreeing and another disagreeing (but eventually complying after finding another solution) on an issue qualifies as consensus. (After all, it's just a duo!) In any case, a list article does sound like the most viable and sensible solution, all things considered so far. Thank you for the suggestion. ～ bytekast [talk • cont • logs] 02:15, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed, that would not be a consensus. The hope is that, through further discussion, you might agree and thus form a consensus. Boldly creating a stand-alone list is another approach. --Bsherr (talk) 02:25, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    In the mean time, you may want to copy the current category contents to one of our user pages for now. RevelationDirect (talk) 22:20, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    For what it's worth, I don't see it as problematic to replace the "examples" with an open-ended list in the article, provided that when the software is known by an initialism, a source is cited for the definition of the initialism. Since the article is short, I don't think such a list would detract, and neither do I think a separate stand-alone list would be justified. So, to that extent, I disagree with User:Escape Orbit. Sorry you are getting the runaround but, based on the guidelines, a category isn't the solution. --Bsherr (talk) 02:05, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
My issue about the list in the article was not that the list would be opened ended, although that is not a desirable situation, but that it had an unexplained, very probably opinion based, split into two lists that performed exactly the same function within the article. Beyond that, I think there needs to be a clearer understanding of the purpose of the article. Is it to explain the naming used across a number of software projects, and beyond, or is it to attempt an exhaustive list of everything that uses it? The former seems like something that Wikipedia should and can do. It only needs examples, and we can safely assume that the reader gets the idea after the first ten. The latter seems like a futile exercise of little use or interest to anyone. Having a category seemed to me to be more apt, but having read WP:SHAREDNAME, perhaps not. I'm not overly concerned either way. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 11:00, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Dong District, Incheon

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Single entry grapesurgeon (talk) 15:05, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Jung District, Incheon

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: single entry grapesurgeon (talk) 15:04, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mamata Banerjee ministries

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Do we really need this category? It has only 3 articles. Instead we can re-purpose it by renaming. I guess if we rename it to Category:Political career of Mamata Banerjee, then more article will be under it. Mehedi Abedin 00:09, 3 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:16, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Royal Navy Radar

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: not a proper name; in accordance with the parent Category:Naval radars. --Altenmann >talk 14:07, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Loyalist slave owners in the Thirteen Colonies

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I don't think that this interseciton is defining. Maybe if this were a war about slavery, maybe... but I don't think that this case applies. SMasonGarrison 13:41, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge a non-defining intersection. I actually think if we are going to keep the slave owner cat, we should limit it to people who owned large numbers of slaves in a way that was economically impact, and exclude people who only owned 1 and maybe a few more slaves. Just how we do not include everyone who owns their house and the small plot of land it is on as a landowner.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:30, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Patriot slave owning and Loyalist slave owning was a big deal during the time of the American Revolution, Wikipedia should keep that distinction intact with the ability to respectively find the information, somewhere in Wikipedia, in separation, with respect to the fact that it adds both historical value as well as encyclopedic value to Wikipedia. See for example Expulsion of the Loyalists, which said Loyalist slave owners took their illicit slave property north with them when they departed the colonies for Loyalist Canada, or the Philipsburg Proclamation, which allowed Loyalist slave owners to keep their "property". Merging this category would leave a bald spot, a blindness, for users seeking this information in an easily accessible way. It would be less encyclopedic to make the information harder to find. I think making information increasingly difficult to find violates what Wikipedia stands for. Progressingamerica (talk) 16:59, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further note, if articles are not in a state subcategory of loyalists or a state subcategory of slave owners yet they should certainly be added manually. But a wholesale merge to the parent categories is inappropriate. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:15, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Harvard College Loyalists in the American Revolution

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I don't think that this intersection is really defining. We don't have alumni by war in any other case that I can find. SMasonGarrison 13:40, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional superhumans

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I discovered a pretty major problem with this category, in that many superheroes, supervillains, and superpowered individuals are not actually human. It's better to get rid of this category than try to fully recategorize all its subcategories to split superhumans from superpowered non-humans. "Superhumans by ability" can be made to work by removing the "superhuman" requirement. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:12, 1 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Why not use superpower like Superpower (ability)? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:05, 1 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Precisely for the reason that article is disambiguated. "Superpower" can also mean a country, making it confusing. "Superpower" also tends to be more heavily associated with superhero comic books rather than fiction overall. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:12, 1 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ambiguity is doubtful in this context, but we can use superpower (ability) if we must. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:39, 1 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"Superbeings" might work. "Supernatural" is not a reasonable word here, since many of these characters are mutants or scientific characters. Perhaps "Fictional characters by ability" would suffice. Mike Selinker (talk) 15:14, 1 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Zxcvbnm: Why do you propose merging Category:Fictional superhumans instead of renaming it like the two lower subcategories? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:49, 1 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's an unnecessary category layer and NARROWCAT, there is not even a need to rename it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:50, 1 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
With current contents, it would make more sense to upmerge Category:Fictional superhumans by ability to it. In that case, we don't lose the other four subcategories (Category:Lists of fictional superhumans, Category:Fictional super soldiers, Category:Superheroes, and Category:Supervillains). Or is your proposal because that the layer is too overlapping with other subcategories of Category:Speculative fiction characters? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:02, 8 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:22, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Charities based in Syria

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 06:08, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

18th century in the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, isolated one-articles categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:19, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional tessenjutsuka

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Many characters in this category are miscategorized, like using normal fans rather than tessen, or just not being defined as a fan fighter. When those are removed, almost nothing remains and this would qualify as a WP:NARROWCAT. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:16, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete We need to avoid categorizing fictional characters just as a user of a weapon just because there is one scene in which he or she uses a that weapon. We should only categorize if use of that weapon is defining to the character. Mulan is not defined as a fan fighter. Most of the film she is using and practicing with other weapons. Weapons people pick up in one fight because of a lack of normal weapons do not become defining because of that.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:36, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Years of the 18th century in Ukraine

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge for now, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:13, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandria basketball containers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: All categories only contain 2026 Women's Basketball League Africa or other categories that contain it. Unhelpful for navigation, article already in other relevant categories. ScalarFactor (talk) 02:42, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sky News Australia reporters and presenters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: C2D after Sky News Australia rebranded as News24 (Australia). Xeronneis (talk) 01:46, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Article disambiguator has been changed per WP:NCBC, category should now instead be moved to Category:News24 (Australian TV channel) reporters and presenters. Happily888 (talk) 13:10, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sky News Australia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: C2D after Sky News Australia rebranded as News24 (Australia). Xeronneis (talk) 01:44, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Article disambiguator has been changed per WP:NCBC, category should now instead be moved to Category:News24 (Australian TV channel). Happily888 (talk) 13:11, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously the category should match wherever the main article ends up. Not sure if it's stable yet though. - RevelationDirect (talk) 22:42, 29 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NAMECHANGES will apply. Can't predict anything though. Οἶδα (talk) 03:21, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]


July 27

[edit]

Category:Ao villages

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Highly overlapping. The target category is more clear in terms of what the contents are SMasonGarrison 22:46, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Glossaries of Christianity

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge for now, only two articles each and not many in the target either, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:04, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Catechetical School of Alexandria

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, only the eponymous article and one subcategory, this is not helpful for navigation. The subcategory suffices. (If kept, it should be speedily renamed per WP:C2D). Marcocapelle (talk) 20:31, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who make mistakes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: We all do. * Pppery * in solidarity 20:29, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
(Serious nomination statement: Fails WP:USERCAT for lacking any discernible collaborative function, see WP:OC/U#all-inclusive. I couldn't resist the pun there) * Pppery * in solidarity 20:29, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, fair, didn't know the guidelines about user categories; the userbox is still fine though, right? WikipediholicRat (talk) 20:51, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed the userbox is find. * Pppery * in solidarity 00:54, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bill 30 schools

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: It's unclear what Bill 30 is referring to nor how it is defining for these institutions. User:Namiba 16:31, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is about Canada, curious to hear User:Bearcat's perspective. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:12, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the ping, Marco. This is, just...wow, how did I not ever know this existed for as long as it has without getting flagged before? "Bill 30", in this context, is referring to the provincial government funding for Catholic high schools, which has existed since 1985 — seriously, I was in high school when it went through, and I'm an old fart — and it covers all Catholic high schools without exception, meaning there's no such thing as a Catholic high school in Ontario that is in any way not a "Bill 30" school, and thus there's absolutely no distinction whatsoever between this and the more general Category:Catholic secondary schools in Ontario that I actually knew about. So yep, this is absolutely a straight-on delete, no question, though obviously there should be some marginal caution taken to ensure that none of these schools are missing from the Catholic secondary schools category.
    Also, why is it a subcategory only of Category:High schools in Toronto, when it's not a uniquely Toronto-specific thing and there's a high school in Windsor filed in it? (Well, okay, that would explain why I didn't know about it — even though I live in Toronto now, I didn't grow up here, so high schools in Toronto have never really been in my editing matrix since I've never had much reason to know anything about most of them.) Seriously, just a hard nope all around: the defining distinction between these and other schools hinges on public vs. Catholic, not on Bill 30 per se. Bearcat (talk) 21:20, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Bearcat. Οἶδα (talk) 21:46, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete as duplicative category, well I guess it does not include schools closed before 1985, but that is not a reasonable way to split categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:27, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Church in East Frisia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Align with the existing tree Category:Christianity in Lower Saxony. ForsythiaJo (talk) 18:12, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:56, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hillcrest High School (Ottawa)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCEPON. User:Namiba 15:53, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People with hypochondriasis

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Was moved from this name per speedy, but I disagree. "Hypochondriacs" is the more concise name, even if it does not match the parent category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:04, 20 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 15:35, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Age controversies in music

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Subcategory of the now deleted Category:Age controversies. The same logic of that discussion, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2026_May_22#Category:Age_controversies, should apply. मल्ल (talk) 13:42, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Port Adelaide Football Club players (all competitions)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories. Merge or reverse merge. SMasonGarrison 22:42, 8 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Follow-up discussion see Category_talk:Port_Adelaide_Football_Club_players_(all_competitions)#c-The-Pope-20260621072100-Deletion_decision. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:04, 21 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: re-opened per the discussion linked above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 15:58, 23 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on containerizing?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 13:40, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison and The-Pope: Thoughts? Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 13:40, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Containerizing would definitely be an improvement. SMasonGarrison 17:49, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Okinawan karateka

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:24, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 18:49, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Destinyokhiria (talk / cont) 15:05, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Category:Okinawan male karateka as a redundant sublayer. It contains 64 articles, and the only direct member of this category is also male. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:09, 25 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Okinawan male karateka. If there are no further comments in a week, we are all set to merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 13:38, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Russian city founders

[edit]
  • Nominator's rationale The top category is just a container category. We do not need it. The sub-cats are misnamed and mis-scoped. What matters is where a populated places was when it was founded. Not where it is now. Not the nationality of the person who founded it. Just where it was / under what governmental authority it was being founded. It does not matter if such a place was a city or some sort of other populated place when founded. The target names make this clear. We may need to adjust the contents some to make sure we have correct inclusion.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:40, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename, it would not be useful to exclude founders of towns or settlements from this category. Not sure of the proposed merge, if not merged then rename to Category:Founders of populated places in Russia. If merged, there should be a See also note on the category pages. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:10, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on the merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 06:55, 27 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 13:35, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnpacklambert: Thoughts on merging? Thoughts on Marcocapelle's alternative rename proposal, if kept? Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 13:36, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • All the actual content is in either The Russian Empire or the Tsardom of Russia category. We have nothing at the Russia category. I do not think it is useful to have a holding category in this case. I think it will be easiest if we just rename the two categories and leave them directly in the founders of populated places category. That category has several categories for past countries, in some cases with no current category country for the thing. Most notable city founding occured before 1918, so this is expected.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:08, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sex and the City season 1 episodes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Other than one episode from season 6, everything else is a redirect. Redirects are handled by Category:Sex and the City episode redirects to lists. --woodensuperman 10:33, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Magmatism by supereon

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only the Precambrian. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:44, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

18th century in Venezuela

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, mostly isolated one- or two-articles categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:19, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, this seems to completely remove these from the Venezuela tree, which isn't helpful. The history of a country is also shaped by what happened before the country was formally established, and certainly the establishment of things (e.g. the Coro Synagogue) still existing in the country is important. There is more chance of people being interested in what was etsablished in Venezuela before it became a country, then people being interested in the eetablishments in the Viceroyalty, and there is no good reason not to let both exist in parallel. Fram (talk) 07:56, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge This is anachronistic. We need to stop imposing the present on the past.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:23, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    This is the standard way that most people look at these things. Which things in country X were established in year/decade/century Y, no matter if their location was formally in country X at that time. If people want to know when the first people arrived in Venezuela, they don't want to hear when Venezuela was created. When they want to know when the first church or synagogue or mosque in Venezuela was established, they don't want a cutoff for when Venezuela itself was created. Old encyclopedia's already use this, "The first episcopal see in Venezuela was that of Caro, founded pursuant to a Bull of Clement VII which was published 21 July, 1531. "[3] doesn't care that Venezuela didn't exist. Books like "A History of Venezuela"[4] have whole chapters about "Colonial life in Venezuela" without people thinking this is unacceptably anachronistic. The "Historical Dictionary of Venezuela"[5] as well has no problem including pre-independence history into a history of Venezuela. Pre-independence establshments and events are part of the history of Venezuela (and often of the present as well) and should be included in a Venezuela tree, next to (e.g. here) a Spanish Empire tree and other relevant ones. "Stop imposing the present on the past" is a useless call, we look at the past from the present all the time, it's how the world and most people work, it's how most people look for or process information. Fram (talk) 15:15, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge To more accurately reflect the actual political/government context. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:37, 28 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of Florence

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, isolated one- or two-articles categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:15, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Given names derived from colors

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SHAREDNAME to a certain extent, not all of the names are solely derived from a color. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:31, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Extreme helium star

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Set category. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:13, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:South African women sports 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 nomination withdrawn LibStar (talk) 23:20, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 02:41, 27 July 2026 (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:Italian women sports 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 nomination withdrawn LibStar (talk) 23:21, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Already in Category:Italian sports journalists and Category:Italian women journalists. LibStar (talk) 01:57, 27 July 2026 (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.

Florida Water Management District Categories

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: (1) The category names do not currently match their main pages, and (2) the disambiguator does not currently reflect the contents of the categories, as few of these properties are actually entitled reserves (as opposed to management areas, conservation areas, etc.), and the categories include useful topics that also are not strictly properties (e.g. Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan or the district main pages themselves).
These categories are therefore better off functioning as institutional categories rather than as reserve categories. Most properties managed by these agencies do not strictly function as "reserves," making the current titles misleading, and creating overly restrictive categories that would exclude most pages relevant to the actual districts. Dropping "reserves" creates a more accurate parent category for the districts' full operational scope. Jacob Rampino (talk) 00:25, 19 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 01:26, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]


July 26

[edit]

Category:Given names derived from animals

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The idea of many of these names being "derived" from animals is highly misleading. A lot of them are only partially based on an animal. It doesn't appear defining for the names either. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:23, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:SHAREDNAME with dubious contents. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:27, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters with eye diseases and disorders

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT and redundant category layer. Somehow this page wasn't deleted when the creator was blocked, it probably should have been. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:04, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge It is likely that most of the characters are, or should be, in one of the subcategories. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:22, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Animals by type

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant. It's obvious that a category called "animals" will list types of animals, without needing a subcategory. Subcategories are not to be used whenever possible, but when necessary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:39, 11 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge taxonomy-related categories, delete those that are not related to taxonomy as ill-defined groupings of unrelated categories. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:03, 11 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think a category like Category:Types of cat should be placed directly in Category:Animals. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:04, 21 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on jlwoodwa's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:56, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Female demons

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Misleading category, many of these are not considered demons nor villains. The gorgons were just monsters. There's also no article specifically about female demons. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:48, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:52, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Zxcvbnm and Johnpacklambert: Thoughts? Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:52, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
No opposition to that if there are actual demon articles caught up in it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:28, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename per precedent, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 May 15#Category:Computer-related introductions. @Sergecross73, DigitalIceAge, and 13akoors: pinging the contributors to that discussion. If this nomination leads to the same rename as before we can presumably rename the lower-level categories via speedy. See also the nomination below. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:44, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the consensus was to rename to Category:Computing introductions, not Category:Computer introductions. DigitalIceAge (talk) 20:02, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:49, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters with speech disorders

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: For most of the characters in this category, it is less a speech disorder and more a vocal tic of the character. Scooby-Doo is even a dog rather than a human. After purging, the category is extremely narrow. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:37, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:46, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Portal-Class road transport pages by location

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These categories have been created as part of over-complete hierarchies. Portals for Canada and China roads were deleted in 2019 per consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Roads of Canada and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:China roads. As far as I can tell, the others have never been populated; there are only portals for US and Australian roads. (This is confirmed by Portal:Roads/Related portals.) The 3 Australia pages in Category:Portal-Class Road transport pages could be moved down into Oceania, but otherwise it is unlikely that any of these will ever be populated. – Fayenatic London 09:22, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 18:46, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Religious buildings and structures in Japan by century

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. A second subcategory each might be added (Shinto shrines) but then we would still not need this extra category layer. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:19, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 18:46, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cultural institutions

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: These are highly overlapping. The main page cultural institution refers to "A cultural institution or cultural organization". The much larger larger is Cultural organizations. SMasonGarrison 17:09, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Employee relations

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Employee relations redirects to Industrial relations. This is part of one category loop at User:SDZeroBot/Category cycles/1 and another loop at User:SDZeroBot/Category cycles/2 * Pppery * in solidarity 18:36, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 13:30, 22 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More thoughts on merge target are needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:47, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional saber-toothed cats

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only contains one article (alongside two redirects). Should also be merged into Category:Fictional mammals. (Oinkers42) (talk) 14:20, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Viceroyalty of New Granada

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, until 1810 mostly isolated one- or two-articles categories, this is not helpful for navigation. (And for the single decade thereafter we do not specifically need a decade category.) Marcocapelle (talk) 13:25, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional bojutsuka

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:USEENGLISH. Alternatively, merge into Category:Fictional stick-fighters per WP:OVERLAPCAT. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:46, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Fictional stick-fighters as WP:NARROWCAT. The absence of any real-world counterpart makes it difficult to discern any naming convention. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:30, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional practitioners of Korean martial arts

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT, redundant category layer. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:36, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Three subcategories, no other contents. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:30, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional elective mutes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Not only is this a WP:OVERLAPCAT, but while muteness in fiction may not conform to the medical definition of selective mutism, it is still often caused by some type of psychological trauma and isn't the product of a completely sane mind. Overall, I don't think the amount of fictional people who are, without a doubt, totally mute purely by choice is sufficient to support a category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:59, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This issue was raised at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_January_17#Category:Silent_protagonists. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:34, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Duchy of Tuscany

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, mostly isolated one- or two-articles categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:15, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aktion T4 euthanasia centres

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The articles in the category use the "killing centre" terminology, and the category should follow suit. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:13, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Same for Category:People murdered at the Bernburg Euthanasia Centre --> Category:People murdered at the Bernburg killing centre. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:38, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]


July 25

[edit]

Encyclopedias by language

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 June 21#Songs by language and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 July 17#Songs by language and the past CfD consensus cited there. These 19 categories are inconsistent with the 40 other categories in Encyclopedias by language. They are also inconsistent with the overwhelming majority of similar Categories by language that already exist on Wikipedia: Albums by language, Books by language, Films by language, Magazines by language, Mass media by language, Newspapers by language, Novels by language, Operas by language, Radio stations by language, Songs by language, Singers by language, Surnames by language, Television by language, Websites by language, Works by language, Writers by language. The exceptions that still exist in the category system are a small minority. Encyclopedias by language was a very messy category with subcats functioning as both language and country cats. I took the time to clean it up and properly organize the articles accordingly. Οἶδα (talk) 22:34, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I've been working hard to write those main articles, create those categories, rename those categories, and reach agreement on those categories. Now all of the sudden lately Οἶδα has apparently been working to undo all this without even notifying me as the creator of various categories and main articles in question, or as the nominator in the various previous CFDs in question. This goes against all established rules and conventions. Per WP:C2D this nomination is inadmissible. NLeeuw (talk) 20:14, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
PS: One thing I will credit Οἶδα with is continuing the effort I've been working on as well, namely a proper separation between Category:Encyclopedias by language and Category:Encyclopedias by country. That is certainly an improvement I am happy with. The main problem I kept running into was that a clean split would result in lots of small categories with 3 or fewer items in them. I see that problem still persists, and might have unintentionally gotten worse in order to complete this separation, although I can't be sure. I'm inclined to think that distinguishing country and language is important enough to warrant a few poorly populated categories though, because it ultimately informs our readers better than mixing country and language up. NLeeuw (talk) 20:24, 26 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Which older CfD consensuses about encylopedias by language are you referring to? I exhaustively outlined the background to all of this at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2026_June_21#Songs_by_language. Apologies for not pinging you there. You were part of the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_August_25#Category:Algerian_writers_in_French that addressed all the considerations for this naming and went in the opposite direction that you had been moving things. I suppose the answer I'm looking for you is precisely why you are now saying this one category should be an exception. The only categories throughout the entire category system that still use the older "in Fooian" format are an extreme minority. They include the "poems by language" categories and several "texts by language" categories. And little else. And those exceptions have remained not as the result of any CfDs deciding they should remain as exceptions. Fundamentally, what is it about these encylopedia categories that warrant exception to:
Books.... but encyclopedias should be formatted Category:Encyclopedias in English? For what precise reason? This expansion of this common format started as the result of older CfDs being overturned with new consensus. So those older CfDs are not reason in itself to have these categories be exceptions. Also I'm not sure WP:C2D dictates this when they are not even eponymous. They are list articles. Οἶδα (talk) 00:16, 27 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:LithTech 2.x games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Highly overlapping and underpopulated. there's no need to break these games down by engine version SMasonGarrison 22:06, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:HyperCard software

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Highly overlapping categories. SMasonGarrison 22:04, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:ToolBook games

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Underpopualted cateogry SMasonGarrison 22:01, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anthems of Algeria

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete for now, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Merging is not needed, the article is already in relevant targets. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:07, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:German military units in the United States

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category newly created solely to hold a single redirect. The thing filed here does not have its own article, but is simply a redirect to a subsection of another article -- and the creator tried to file this in Category:Foreign military units in the United States, a redlinked category that does not exist and had to be removed, as a parent. It's also rather debatable whether a pilot training center would even count as a "military unit" anyway, so it's not unequivocally clear that the category is even correct in the first place -- but regardless, it's hardly necessary for just one redirect, when there's no comprehensive international scheme in place for this to be part of. Bearcat (talk) 15:02, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Simon Property Group templates

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: A category created in 2016 consists of one template, Template:Simon Property Group. The category is unlikely to grow. Propose upmerge to Category:United States shopping mall companies templates. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:55, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Law by region

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, convention is to use "by location", see Category:Categories by location. "Region" is used as a specific type of location, e.g. in case of Middle East or Midlands. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:32, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Law enforcement by region

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. The subcategory is already in the North American tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:28, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indigenous peoples of Northeast India

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, both articles are already in Category:Naga ethnic groups. These two are not "more Indigenous" than other Naga ethnic groups. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:02, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gaza war protests at universities

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Consistent with the article title Gaza war protests at universities, which was formed from a merger of 2024 pro-Palestinian protests on university campuses and 2025 pro-Palestinian protests on university campuses. The subdivisions by date are an artefact of when the scope of the main article didn't yet extend past 2024. Further articles for 2025 weren't created for the United States but were for the Netherlands, meaning that articles like 2025 Gaza war protests at universities in the Netherlands are artificially excluded from the main category tree for Gaza war protests at universities. Ham II (talk) 08:08, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Combat diving

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Seems to be WP:OVERLAPCAT, I can't really see how these are so different that it merits a different category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:13, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 07:14, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Textiles of India

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete, the articles are already in Category:Indian clothing. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:11, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Naga culture

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, largely overlapping scope. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:09, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Eastern Persian dialects in Afghanistan

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There's little reason to specify this for Afghanistan when there's no category for Eastern Persian dialects broadly. It's either that or we rename this to Persian language in Afghanistan and create a separate Eastern Persian dialects category. Arctic Circle System (talk) 06:33, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

17th century in Poland

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge just like all other years and decades of the 17th century of Poland have been merged. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:30, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Saint-Domingue

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, Saint Domingue existed from 1697 to 1803, there is no reason to split this by century. Move the 18th-century parent categories of Category:18th century in Haiti over to Category:Saint-Domingue. Move the 18th-century parent category of Category:18th-century Haitian people over to Category:People from Saint-Domingue. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:21, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sportspeople convicted of sex crimes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This is, for the vast majority of its contents, not WP:DEFINING, and while it does specify "convicted" it still has the potential for serious BLP issues. The Bushranger One ping only 05:26, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Garages (parking)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:C2D, consistency with main article's name, and WP:ENGVAR
These categories contain articles about commercial buildings for vehicle parking. The main article is Multistorey car park, which is a Britishism, while "Parking garage" is the American phrase. The current category names are ambiguous and could just as easily describe parking structures in houses, for which we have Category:Garages (residential). - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:10, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lockheed Martin-associated military facilities

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCASSOC
Lockheed Martin is a major American defense contractor that has countless contracts at military bases. United States Air Force Plant 4, United States Air Force Plant 6, and Skunk Works are LM specific facilities so it makes sense to upmerge those. The rest are not defined by the presence of this company within a larger military complex. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:10, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Extrajudicial prisons of the United States

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Without additional explanation, having both categories seems confusing. Note that Category:Detention centers for extrajudicial prisoners of the United States is included in Category:Extrajudicial prisoners of the United States, which is then included in Category:Extrajudicial prisons of the United States. 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:03, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Games by Apollo

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Currently a topic category containing the main article, and video games by the company Games by Apollo. Proposal is to make it a WP:SETCAT, and re-cat into Category:Video games by American companies. 1857a (talk) 01:00, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Rename Only one article that is not a game by the studio. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:25, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]


July 24

[edit]

Category:Religious organisations based in Arunachal Pradesh

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created 2-article category. Merge to parents. 1) Category:Religious organisations based in India is not diffused by state. 2) Category:Organisations based in Arunachal Pradesh is by no means in need of diffusion. Gjs238 (talk) 23:35, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Buildings and structures in Kanagawa Prefecture by city

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Opens the scope of the category to also include Buildings and structures in Hakone, since Hakone is a town rather than a city. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:35, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fargo–Moorhead

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: More well-suited name and aligned with other metropolitan pages and categories (and the main page was renamed to also align with the change). OWaunTon (talk) 18:20, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Las Vegas (TV series) characters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Not a single character in the category has an article, so should be converted to maintenance category. --woodensuperman 15:24, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All redirects point to the main TV series article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:56, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Star Trek: Picard episodes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: No actual episodes have articles, they are all redirects, which are handled by the maintenance category Category:Star Trek: Picard episode redirects to lists. The season articles can go in Category:Star Trek: Picard. --woodensuperman 12:00, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Abbott Elementary characters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This only contains redirects, should be converted to a maintenance category. --woodensuperman 11:52, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters who use magic

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The category currently fails WP:NONDEF. It should be purged of any characters who have sparingly used magic, focusing only on characters who are known for their magic or specialize in it. Most characters will probably remain in it, but stuff like Category:Pokémon species, Category:Fictional spirits, or Mothra would not make sense after such a move. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:55, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support to match main article. I don't think this proposal was sufficiently evaluated in the previous CfD. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:57, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Viceroyalty of Peru

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, mostly isolated one- or two-articles categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:58, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1998 in Manipur

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete for now, isolated year category with only one article and one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:43, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. The category creator has made a lot of these... SMasonGarrison 12:38, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Histories of colonies

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, all of it is history, there is no need for a separate history category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:15, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, don't understand the nom. Ancient Rome no longer exists, so we can't have a category for the History of Ancient Rome any more as that would be redundant, something like that? "History" here is separate from things like Category:People from New Spain, or the art with cats like Category:Spanish Colonial architecture in Mexico. Something like Category:16th century in New Spain belongs in a "History of New Spain" category quite obviously, just like we build all other "history of" categries. No objection against upmerging the "history by period" one into the "history" one though. Fram (talk) 08:00, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per WP:OVERLAPCAT and WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. With former countries it's all history so determining what goes in a "history of" subcat versus the main country parent category is subjective. - RevelationDirect (talk) 11:42, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    That just makes no sense. Why is it subjective for former countries, but not for current countries? We put articles and subcats about periods, years, centuries into the "history of" cats, just like we put articles and subcats about people into the "people from" cat. It doesn't become subjective because the entity no longer exists (on the contrary, there would be slightly more of an argument to call it subjective for a current country, where e.g. the "2026" articles could be said to not belong in the history at a stretch). What articles or subcats in "Category:History of New Spain" are subjective entries, and why wouldn't they be subjective entries if New Spain still existed?
    Please look again at WP:SUBJECTIVECAT, this has nothing at all to do with this nomination. As for "overlap", History clearly is a subset of everything that can be said about a country, and there is no reason why this would change when the country ceases to exist. History, as separate from Geography, People, ... is a typical topic of interest and a broadly used category on enwiki. Removing these for just these few categories seems completely random, no idea why these are picked out of Category:History by former country. If you want to get rid of all of these, I would suggest starting a discussion for them all. If not, then please explain the difference between the ones nominated and the ones you don't want to delete. Fram (talk) 11:56, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    From my perspective, the people, geography, and architecture are all part of the history of a former territory, i.e. there is no subset of non-historical subcategories. Based on your examples above you seem to think they are not part of the history. (Correct me if I'm misinterpreting). I think both of our perspectives are reasonable and that you make sense, while respectfully disagreeing.
    Regardless of which one of us is correct, that subjectivity in what counts as history is not well served by the bright line in/out nature of categories. Current territories don't have that issue since there are subcategories for current things as well as one for past ones. RevelationDirect (talk) 12:21, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    You have not indicated why we would treat current and former countries differently, nor why we should treat these countries differently from all other former ones. The distinction you make with current countries is not at all how every single category tree is built until now. We don't separate "current" people and "historical" people from current countries, we don't separate "current" art and "historical" art from current countries, and the "history" category tree of probably every country includes not only current, but even future things like Category:2034 in the United States without anyone having an issue with "subjective" cat or "overlap" cats. So no, not "both of our perspectives are reasonable", your perspective is inventing completely new interpretations of overlapcat and subjectivecat to rationalize an indefensible, random deletion of bog-standard categories from one country. Everyone understands that a book about the History of X has different contents than a book about the Economy of X, the Arts of X, or the Geography of X. Whether X is a former or current country makes no difference there. Fram (talk) 13:21, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • If New Spain would still exist then an article like Slavery in New Spain would become part of a social history category. Other articles would become part of cultural history, or political history. Regardless, it is all history. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:21, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Italian motoring journalists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Already in Category:20th-century Italian journalists. LibStar (talk) 04:56, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Law by forum

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category previously housed 1 page and 3 categories. The page was already tagged by a relevant legal category (Economic law). Each of the 3 categories was also tagged under either the 'Law by issue' tag or the 'Law by topic' tag, (both of which contain a far larger number of categories/articles). It is unclear what additional categorical precision was provided by 'Law by forum' beyond these existing categories and, indeed, it arguably made the typology more confusion. For this reason, propose that this category be deleted. Murr1321 (talk) 04:17, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Just looking at the larger categorization system, there are quite a few ways in which the current category taxonomy doesn't seem fully thought out. For instance, "law by region" doesn't really make sense; there are very few situations in which topics in law x with continental divisions. It was probably included simply to break down the country list, but 200-ish country subcategories is not really so many that it has to be broken down -- it's not overwhelming, because it's a discrete / finite alphabetic list; not 200 separate articles. It would make sense in environmental or geographic categories, but not really in legal systems; for instance, Commonwealth countries might share some legal apparatus, but they're split over multiple continents.
- Back to "forum" -- topic sometimes overlaps with forum, but not always; military courts handle non-military law, civilian courts sometimes handle military law. Trade courts can be international. .... Anyway, it's not a hill I'm going to die on, and I'm guessing that the person who nom'd this for deletion -- and whoever depopulated the category -- is trying to thin out categories. If the goal is to thin out categories & have only a small number of categories that organize content in semi-arbitrary but standard ways, then sure, delete the category. If the goal of the category system is to appropriately categorize content to enable sorting & finding content through topic-specific divisions, then I would keep it and actually file content in appropriate ways. Lquilter (talk) 16:28, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Extinct Native American tribes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: to make it more clear about the exact geographical range of this category and for parity with categories similar to this one 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 02:46, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Australian motoring writers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 02:08, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with above have struck out non-fiction writers. LibStar (talk) 05:01, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Recipients of the Long Service Medal (Military) (Singapore)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCAWARD, WP:ARBITRARYCAT, and WP:OVERLAPCAT
Singapore automatically issues the Long Service Medal (Military) to anyone who served in the military for 25 years. A career in the military is defining which is why we have Category:Singaporean military personnel, but automatically receiving an award for that same service is not. I listed all the recipients right here in the main article for any reader interested in this topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:50, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Maria Moors Cabot Prize winners

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCAWARD and WP:NONDEFINING
Columbia University issues the Pulitzer Prize in journalism and letters, one of the few awards that is defining to the recipients. They also issue a much less prominent journalism award called the Maria Moors Cabot Prize. But don't take my word for it, Jacqueline Charles, Karen DeYoung, and Julia Preston each won both awards and those articles make it crystal clear which award is defining and which one is not. The contents of the category are already listed in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:50, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]


July 23

[edit]

Category:1991 in Assam

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: isolated and redundant category, upmerge for now. SMasonGarrison 23:53, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Italian Rally Championship seasons

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created 1-article category. Only 1 season of Italian Rally Championship has an article. Gjs238 (talk) 23:43, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Villages in Dimapur district

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category, upmerge for now. (The category creator has made a lot of underpopulated categories that are missing relevant parents.) SMasonGarrison 22:39, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mizo films

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Highly overlapping categories. SMasonGarrison 22:32, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Singers from Kohima

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer, upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 22:29, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cheeses with designation of origin protected in the European Union

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Standard English word order; consistency with parent category Category:Products with protected designation of origin pburka (talk) 22:27, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Anthologies by editor

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Rename to match all of the other book categories which are in the form "[Works] by [person]", compared to, say, Albums by artist categories, which are in this Bob Dylan albums format. Presumably Anthologies by editor shouldn't adopt that format. Also, I believe it is important the categories be named "Anthologies edited by [person]" because "Anthologies by [person]" is vague and implies a level of authorship that is not the case. The last two categories I've nominated include the publishing company's name (DAW/ACE), which I feel is unnecessary. We don't further diffuse albums by artist+record label nor books by author+publisher (i.e. Frank Sinatra Capitol Records albums etc). Οἶδα (talk) 21:11, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rick and Morty (video games)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Of the three articles, only two of them are actually Rick and Morty video games, with MultiVersus being a crossover. Two articles are not enough for a category. Those two are already present in Category:Rick and Morty. If kept, it should definitely be moved to Category:Video games based on Rick and Morty. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:42, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:21st-century American pornographic film actresses

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Dual merge. This is a narrow intersection. I don't think we need to do this for pornographic film actresses SMasonGarrison 16:30, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Films of all kinds are so new that we can realisitically only have two by century sub-categories. We do not even sub-divide film actresses by century, there is no reason to so subdivide a sub-group of such actresses.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:32, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Year month country intersections

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Small categories (1 article each) that do not help navigation. User:Namiba 15:59, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Academics by ethnicity

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: parent Academics was redirected to scholars and academics SMasonGarrison 13:15, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Universities and colleges in Dąbrowa Górnicza

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Single-article category with very little potential for expansion. Janhrach (talk) 11:32, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ap stars

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Matching main article Ap and Bp stars about two closely related types. Likely a mixture of Ap and a small fraction of Bp stars. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:07, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: for some background, this category (and article) describes a single grouping of chemically-peculiar stars. Early discoveries were all of spectral class A, but later some were found of spectral class B, but still forming a continuous grouping of stars that happen to straddle the two spectral classes (somewhat arbitrary, man-made, divisions). They are still frequently (nearly always?) referred to simply as Ap stars; the reason for the more general article name is obvious although the term "Bp stars" is rarely seen. Lithopsian (talk) 19:04, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Road bridges in Saudi Arabia

[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). toby (t)(rw) 05:00, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Already in Category:Bridges in Saudi Arabia. LibStar (talk) 06:58, 23 July 2026 (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:Peoples of North Korea

[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). toby (t)(rw) 05:00, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant to Category:North Korean people, and improperly named. 1234qwer1234qwer4 05:15, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Only content is Kim Jong Un, the current supreme leader. Category:Ethnic groups in North Korea also exists. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:37, 23 July 2026 (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:Captaincy General of the Philippines

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). toby (t)(rw) 05:00, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, largely overlapping. There is a case to be made that the Captaincy General of the Philippines is the official name of what is called Spanish East Indies as a common name. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:02, 23 July 2026 (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.

Caribbean people by nationality

[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). toby (t)(rw) 04:59, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer, the parent categories are otherwise almost empty. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:47, 23 July 2026 (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:Brightest stars

[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). toby (t)(rw) 04:58, 30 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No well-defined non-arbitrary cutoff. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:24, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It think it should not be delted but moved to Brightest star in night sky Abdullah1099 (talk) 14:48, 25 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
List of brightest stars already exists. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:23, 26 July 2026 (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.

Older discussions

[edit]

The above are up to 7 days old. For a list of unclosed discussions more than seven days old, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All old discussions. For older closed and unclosed discussions, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 8 to 21 days.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/All_current_discussions&oldid=1322490129"