Edge Rewrite
location Source code View original
// 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: a25039090a64e9de

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

August 2

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:S Club 7

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There's a lot going on this category about the pop group S Club. There's their activities as S Club 7, which includes one album as "S Club" after a member leaves. There's the activity of their spinoff kids group S Club 8. There's the activities of S Club Allstars, which is a combination of the previous two groups. All of it occurs under the umbrella of "S Club," which should thus be the category title. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:56, 2 August 2026 (UTC)reply



August 1

[edit]

Category:Resistance to the Spanish Empire

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:37, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:People with FOO disorders

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There is no need to isolate these people based on the symptoms they experience. It doesn't serve navigation and in my view is problably contrary to WP:EGRSD in regard to disability. SMasonGarrison 21:38, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
This is not based on "symptoms", it is an entire classification of mental disorders that affect brain development (neurodevelopment) and onset in the early developmental period (childhood, often defined as before age 18). See also existing categories Category:People with genetic disorders, Category:People with rare diseases, Category:People with mood disorders, Category:People with personality disorders, etc. Shocksingularity (talk) 21:44, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Highly overlapping categories. SMasonGarrison 21:27, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
The newly-created category is highly redundant with the long existing Category:People with psychotic disorder. Category:People with psychotic disorder is being used to describe people with documented psychosis, while the new category is being treated as a parent category that I think is trying to isolate specific mental diagnoses based on symptoms. SMasonGarrison 21:29, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
As creator of the new category, I would merge the other way. "Psychotic disorders" is a broader, recognized classification of different disorders that cause psychosis, such as schizophrenia and delusional disorder - see BlockL1‑6A2 in the ICD-11 and the "Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorders" chapter of the DSM-V. "Psychotic disorder" implies one specific disorder, but there is no disorder with that name.
I would also support merging the categories and renaming to "people with psychosis", although this risks implying that people listed are currently undergoing psychosis. Shocksingularity (talk) 21:39, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
I just don't see the benefit to categorizing/isolating people to this level of detail for their disabilities. It seems contrary to the spirit of EGRS. SMasonGarrison 21:41, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
I am trying moreso to group categories of similar disabilities so pages like Category:People by medical or psychological condition and Category:People with disabilities aren't flooded with a million subcategories. The people are all still in their original categories, I'm just grouping some of the categories to reduce clutter. For example, people with autism are still in the Category:Autistic people, it's just that Category:Autistic people is now under Category:People with neurodevelopmental disorders instead of directly under Category:People with mental disorders. Shocksingularity (talk) 21:51, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Works about cattle

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:16, 11 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Merge to Category:Cattle in popular culture and Category:Foxes in popular culture as redundant categories that I had to connect to to find them. Alternatively, reverse merge those categories to these ones in line with "X in fiction" precedents. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:05, 11 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Note these were only recently created by @Johnpacklambert and while I don't believe it is good practice to leave them in this state, I'm curious what the intent was in creating them and if there is further work intended. As is I support merging, though as noted they may not need to be and can just be deleted. WinstonDewey (talk) 20:35, 13 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sennecaster (Chat) 18:18, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Pages with citation errors

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The former is a parent category for malformed <ref> syntax according to the description, while the latter hosts such pages directly. Category:Pages with Cite taxon errors should probably be moved to Category:Articles with incorrect citation syntax, but having the rest entirely separate from the other categories seems confusing. 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:57, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Hard Rock Cafe

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Alongside changing the parent page for this category from Hard Rock Cafe to Hard Rock International. My reasoning for it; Places in the category, such as Hard Rock Hotel & Casino Sioux City, are entirely separate from the cafes; in fact, that location does not have a Hard Rock Cafe. Neither does the former Hard Rock Casino Vancouver or Hard Rock Stadium. The article I'm working on in my sandbox also does not have a Hard Rock Cafe. Making the category based strictly on the restaurant division is potentially confusing, and it would be better to rename it this way to better reflect and match the pages in this category. Hard Rock Hotel and Casino itself operates separately from the restaurant division. Aspifi (talk | contributions) 15:02, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Buildings and structures in Shimane Prefecture by city

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To make room for towns in their respective parent categories (Shimane: Misato, Okuizumo, Tsuwano; Saga: Arita; Tokyo: Okutama; Wakayama: Katsuragi, Kushimoto, Nachikatsuura). See also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 July 24#Category:Buildings and structures in Kanagawa Prefecture by city. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:44, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Other prefectures did not have any town subcats so I left those out, but if it's preferred that they all be renamed for consistency's sake then I can nominate those too. There's also the question of Hokkaido, which has both buildings and structures in Hokkaido by city and by town; should those be merged into buildings and structures in Hokkaido by populated place also to keep consistency? QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:53, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:History of the Jews in the Mashriq

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: A similar category for the Mashriq does not exist, which can be verified with a look through Category:Mashriq. There is no evidence that this category should exist either, since it only contains sub-categories. For comparision, there is no Category:History of the Jews in the Great Lakes region, despite Jewish people also being notably present there. HerrHeulsuse (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Keep BOTH categories because (1) Any category does not owe its existence to an article that has not been written yet since categories are often created before and precede articles. (2) Paradoxically, part of the nominator's "rational" actually supports a small parent category that is made up of WP:N sub-categories, this helps readers and web searches finding such categories much easier had the parent category not existed. (3) The nominator, or anyone else, is free to create an article about Jews in the Great Lakes region since WP:NOTPAPER and the absence of such an article until now is not a reason to push out and destroy other helpful and well thought out categories and articles that exist because editors have taken the time to create them. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! IZAK (talk) 02:33, 2 August 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
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 13:22, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete: Naga ethnic groups is a subcat of multiple cats which already cover this. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 15:02, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Lisa Nandy

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category empty except for the eponymous article; not a prominent enough politician to suggest it will be populated anytime soon. See also, nominations for Category:Chris Bryant and Category:Torsten Bell. OGBC1992 (talk) 09:56, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete per nomination. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:57, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Chris Bryant

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category empty except for the eponymous article; not a prominent enough politician to suggest it will be populated anytime soon. See also, nominations for Category:Torsten Bell and Category:Lisa Nandy. OGBC1992 (talk) 09:56, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete per nomination. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:57, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Torsten Bell

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category empty except for the eponymous article; not a prominent enough politician to suggest it will be populated anytime soon. See also, nominations for Category:Chris Bryant and Category:Lisa Nandy. OGBC1992 (talk) 09:55, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete per nomination. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:57, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Gamergate (harassment campaign)

[edit]

Category:Fictional tonfajutsuka

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT. Most are already listed as ninja if necessary, so I don't think a dual merge is needed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:42, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Fictional saijutsuka and jittejutsuka

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT. The members are all in some other related category, like ninja, stick-fighters or what have you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:40, 1 August 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
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: dual merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:24, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:1847 establishments in the Philippines

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 July 19#19th century in the Spanish East Indies, this should be likewise upmerged. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:10, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply


July 31

[edit]

Antisemitic political parties by country

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There was an entire discussion held that forbid categorizing groups or people as antisemitic [1]. The category description of Category:Antisemitism, of which this is a child category, in fact says "It must not include articles about individuals or groups that are allegedly antisemitic.". This is a MOS:LABEL issue and cannot be presented this way. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:48, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Strong Keep These categories are limited to certain countries in Europe and the United States; they are not categories related to the controversial Middle Eastern anti-Zionist political parties. In particular, in the German Empire and the Weimar Republic, "antisemitic political parties" were a type of political party. ProgramT (talk) 00:35, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
If we do not create only categories related to non-European, non-American parties, there is absolutely no reason to delete existing categories. ProgramT (talk) 00:39, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
(Note, this is the category creator). So what? Source? And why would that make it any better? The consensus is that the antisemitism tree "must not include articles about individuals or groups that are allegedly antisemitic", at all. It is a MOS:LABEL violation. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:45, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
However, the concept of "antisemitic political parties" is more nuanced; rather than mere slanderous labeling, there were actually many political parties in 19th‑century Europe that directly referred to themselves as "antisemitic political party". ProgramT (talk) 00:56, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
1. Source? 2. That would not solve the issue. 3. That does not apply to the contents of these categories. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:14, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Source: Hermann Greive: Geschichte des modernen Antisemitismus in Deutschland. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1983, S. 70.
On the German Wikipedia page, there is an article titled de:Antisemitenparteien and a category named de:Kategorie:Antisemitische Partei. ProgramT (talk) 01:31, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Could you get a quote from that source?
That Wikipedia article is almost entirely unsourced and the claims that are sourced do not say what you are claiming. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:20, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Furthermore, even before I created these categories, there were many instances where specific types of political parties were categorized based on discrimination (e.g., Category:Political parties with anti-Hungarian sentiment, Category:Anti-Romanyist parties in the Czech Republic, Category:Anti-Islam political parties, etc.). ProgramT (talk) 01:01, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Those are problematic too. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:15, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
However, I believe it is unfair that while there is almost no controversy regarding political party categories related to other forms of discrimination, deletion discussions are frequently held regarding categories associated with Jews and antisemitism. I, too, believe that anti-Zionism and antisemitism are distinct, and this category does not apply to articles that express hostility solely toward Israel, rather than toward ethnic Jews. ProgramT (talk) 01:37, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
I did not mention Zionism in this conversation. That is not the issue, the issue is MOS:LABEL and our longstanding consensus that the antisemitism tree "must not include articles about individuals or groups that are allegedly antisemitic", at all. There is no objective way to determine it ; why wouldn't we include anti-Zionist groups, by the scope this category is using? Feel free to suggest deletion for the other bias categories applying to groups or people - I will support the deletion noms. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:21, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Scholars of ancient Greek history

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT and, unlike other Historians of Foo categories, the parent category is currently empty, with just subcats. Brandmeister talk 22:29, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Merge, looks like a very similar scope. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:42, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Comment: there are two possible issues with this proposal. One is that "historians of ancient Greece" sounds like it would mean the same thing as "ancient Greek historians", although its contents are modern historians and scholars. This would likely cause confusion over what articles should be included or excluded, and it would be a candidate for renaming to something less ambiguous. Secondly, not all of the persons in this category are identified as "historians". Some are scholars in other fields relating to ancient Greece, such as linguists, mythographers, classicists, etc. They fit loosely under the current category name, but would clearly be excluded under the proposed name. Is there any benefit to narrowing the scope of the category? Remember, the category name will tend to govern what is added to or removed from the category, rather than the intent of the persons involved in this discussion. P Aculeius (talk) 14:03, 1 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Gran Hermano (Spanish TV series) winners

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated categories. there is no need to slice up this category to have one or two people in it SMasonGarrison 18:48, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Ambassadors of Australia to Colombia

[edit]

Category:Stoke City L.F.C. players

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Correct name of club as per Stoke City F.C. Women Add92 (talk) 18:01, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Ambassadors of Austrlia to San Marino

[edit]

Category:Ambassadors of Australia to Romania

[edit]

Category:Ambassadors of Australia to Zimbabwe

[edit]

Category:Businesspeople from Fargo, New Mexico

[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: speedy delete. Per WP:G7. Epicgenius (talk) 17:37, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Speedy deletion, I had a severe dyslexic moment. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 16:24, 31 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:Academics by nationality

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: parents (Scholars and academics) have been combined per discussion. so this category should also be merged SMasonGarrison 12:35, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Health professionals from the District Municipality of Muskoka

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category. upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 12:26, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Belgian drag performers by populated place

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: there are only two populated places in here, upmerge for now. the norm is that we have more than two. SMasonGarrison 12:17, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Establishment category Indian state tracking categories

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary tracking categories. BlasterOfHouses (HouseBlaster's alt • talk • he/they) 11:55, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Paintings in Gotha

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:54, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Tourism in Gotha

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:52, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Artists that declined XXL Freshmen

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: We don't need a category for the refusal of a particular magazine write-up. It's not important enough to these people who said no. It's not defining. They went on to become notable despite the refusal. Binksternet (talk) 05:59, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. Good find. this definitely isn't defining. SMasonGarrison 12:23, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:1494 in the Spanish Empire

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, isolated single-article category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:59, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Kingdom of Sardinia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, mostly isolated one- or two-articles categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Merge to decades in the 1840s and 1850s. If there is consensus to merge to Europe instead of to Italy then by all means but I do not expert so considering previous discussions. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:23, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Schools in Kannur

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 03:13, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply


July 30

[edit]

Category:Railway stations in Gotha

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge as unhelpful for navigation; only two members. 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:34, 30 July 2026 (UTC)reply
You mean merge to Category:Rail transport in Gotha and Category:Railway stations in Thuringia, right? Both are already in Category:Buildings and structures in Gotha (district). Οἶδα (talk) 22:44, 30 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Books about white nationalism in the United States

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: With only a few articles in each category, and most of the books in the parent also focusing on white nationalism in the United States, and most of the articles in this category also focusing on white nationalism outside of the United States, I don't think it is worth making this separation on the book level. Too closely intertwined. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:08, 30 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Filipino Resistance activists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OVERLAPCAT, all articles but one are also in Category:People of the Philippine Revolution and there is no reason to keep these articles apart. The one exception is Aman Dangat, that article just does not fit together with the rest. There is also not an article Filipino Resistance. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:38, 30 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Filipino independence activists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, largely overlapping categories. All five articles and the subcategory are about people of the Philippine Revolution and there is no reason to keep these specific articles apart. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:26, 30 July 2026 (UTC)reply

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
More pedantically, but with relevance to this discussion, the style is written in English Wikipedia as Spanish colonial architecture. I would therefore have allowed this set as WP:C2D, per Talk:Spanish_colonial_architecture#Requested_move_12_May_2026. – Fayenatic London 21:05, 1 August 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

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
  • Keep per User:Fram. This category has enough articles for diffusion. The "Transgender villains" category can be merged for now until there are enough articles. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 16:09, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Withdraw Based on the argument above, I've been convinced it is in fact defining as a category. I would withdraw the nomination, but it would be a supervote. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:42, 1 August 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 [3], 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. "[4] doesn't care that Venezuela didn't exist. Books like "A History of Venezuela"[5] have whole chapters about "Colonial life in Venezuela" without people thinking this is unacceptably anachronistic. The "Historical Dictionary of Venezuela"[6] 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

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"