Edge Rewrite
restyle 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.

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]


On hold pending other discussion
[edit]
  • None currently.


Moved to full discussion
[edit]

Current discussions

[edit]

October 3

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:Actresses from Rajahmundry

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To reflect recent renaming of Rajahmundry to Rajamahendravaram Iamcarbonmatter ♥ xoxo ✦ 11:31, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Actors from Rajahmundry

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To reflect recent renaming of Rajahmundry to Rajamahendravaram Iamcarbonmatter ♥ xoxo ✦ 11:31, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Male actors from Rajahmundry

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To reflect recent renaming of Rajahmundry to Rajamahendravaram Iamcarbonmatter ♥ xoxo ✦ 11:30, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Latter Day Saint belief and doctrine

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, for consistency with article space, Latter-day Saint belief redirects to Mormonism. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:55, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Latter Day Saint concepts of the afterlife

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, for brevity, and aligning with Category:Afterlife in Christianity. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:47, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Disney core universe characters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: More accurate name given the characters included in the category. "Disney core universe" is not well-defined given how the company also sees Disney Princesses and the other feature films as their core properties. Go D. Usopp (talk) 03:51, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply


South Downs artists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Would be in line with Category:English artists by county. Note that there are no other categories related to either of these geographical locations though. 1234qwer1234qwer4 19:01, 24 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 01:55, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Corendon Kinheim players

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Removing outdated sponsor for a baseball team's player categories. (Not all players listed played for the team,Kinheim, during this sponsorship. HonkBase (talk) 15:31, 24 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 01:54, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Trichy railway division

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Opposed Speedy nomination. The main article Tiruchirappalli railway division has never been at Trichy railway division, nor has a Requested Move for the page been initiated to take it there. Citations in the railway division article vary between Trichy, Tiruchirappalli and Tiruchchirappalli. All other categories within Category:Tiruchirappalli use this spelling. – Fayenatic London 14:59, 31 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See RM at Talk:Tiruchirappalli_railway_division#Requested_move_24_September_2026.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:01, 24 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: article has now been renamed, following an uncontested RM discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 01:48, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

October 2

[edit]

Category:Diamond merchants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: No functional difference between categories, and I have already moved the only two pages that were in this one to that one. It might make sense to include a separate category for companies rather than individuals. Qualiesin (talk) 21:10, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Establishments in the Falkland Islands by year

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Narrow and sparsely populated categories WP:NARROW and WP:OCYEAR. The merge targets maintain the larger establishments and timeline navigation trees. Boots the Blackfoot Ferret 19:47, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
@Blackfootferret: Territories is miscapitalized in all the targets for "dependent territories of the United Kingdom". –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:33, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:German Jewish military personnel of World War II

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To reflect renaming of the related article. McPhail (talk) 16:52, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Films about social realism

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: delete or rename, maybe this is a proper genre, in that case rename, but it is certainly not a topic, "about" does not make sense. The category looks like a case of WP:OR. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:26, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

19th-century establishments in Trinidad and Tobago

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Narrow and sparsely populated categories per WP:NARROW and WP:OCYEAR. Merging to the targets preserves the establishments and timeline navigation trees. Boots the Blackfoot Ferret 15:26, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Latter Day Saint terms

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: manually merge, a "term" is not a defining characteristic. We normally do not have terms categories, we do have terminology categories if there are articles about terminology. But the articles in this category are not articles about terminology as a subject, they rather are articles about subjects in Latter Day Saints. Move articles to the root category if they aren't already somewhere else in the Latter Day Saints tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:06, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Palaeontologists from Northern Ireland

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 06:42, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Companies listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Exchange changed from this old name in 2000, thereafter using "JSE Securities Exchange". Then, in 2005, it switched to "JSE Limited". So, simply using JSE would be most appropriate. Husskeyy (talk) 06:37, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Threads (social network) userboxes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Too narrow, only has one userbox in it. Merge to the parent category (apologies if any of this is wrong). ⚙ Crash >> Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 04:28, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Deserts of Bulgaria

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer Arctic Circle System (talk) 03:16, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Deserts of Lithuania and Russia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer Arctic Circle System (talk) 03:14, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Clans based in South Jeolla Province

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: rename, the territory of former South Jeolla Province is now part of Jeonnam-Gwangju. Marcocapelle (talk) 00:21, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:History of South Jeolla Province

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, South Jeolla is a former province, so everything is history. There is no need for two separate categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 00:18, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

October 1

[edit]

Category:Frontier League userboxes

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: As of today, the Frontier League has changed its name to the National Association of Professional Baseball. With two new teams joining, I took the initiative to create a new National Association category for such userboxes; however, a certain editor seems to find my moves "disruptive" and says I should do a CfD instead. So, although I was reluctant to do so because of the FL team userboxes of teams which folded before the NA rebrand, I am starting this discussion for a category merge, in the hopes that we can have peace. Tom Danson (talk) 19:11, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Governors of Cartagena, Colombia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Empty category inexplicably redirected. There is no established practice in redirecting city categories to province categories. This should have been deleted as empty. ✗plicit 14:23, 3 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 18:56, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Delete per nom. There should be a high bar of need for redirects. We don't need thousands of such redirect shortcuts. If someone creates a governor article, they can easily place it in Colombian governors and also easily diffuse it to subcats for which Wikipedia actually has enough existing articles. Οἶδα (talk) 21:37, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Younger sons of British peers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Looks WP:NONDEFINING, being a younger son or a wive of a younger son doesn't confer anything special as far as I know. Possibly could be upmerged to Category:Children of British peers and peeresses. Brandmeister talk 18:53, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Premier Volleyball League men's division teams

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Spikers' Turf and the PVL men's division are in the same lineage and have shared history, so putting them into a single unified category may be a better option. MarcusAbacus (talk) 18:29, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Disestablishments in Mauritius

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Narrow categories per WP:NARROW and WP:OCYEAR. The merge targets maintain the existing disestablishments and timeline trees. Boots the Blackfoot Ferret 17:21, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

12th-century establishments in Scotland

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Narrow categories per WP:NARROWCAT and WP:OCYEAR; not helpful for navigation. The merge targets to the decades of establishments in Scotland and the year establishments in Europe maintain the establishments category tree while the year in Scotland targets maintain the timeline. Boots the Blackfoot Ferret 14:52, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Computation oracles

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: To be eponym with main article, Oracle machine; also notice there ins't a redirect Computation oracle. fgnievinski (talk) 14:07, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Speedy rename per C2D. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:50, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Social media influencers subcategories

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Six categories with five patterns. Maybe this could at least partly be made more consistent. "Accounts" seems particularly weird, and "creators" and "content creators" could probably be harmonised. 1234qwer1234qwer4 01:41, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

September 30

[edit]

Category:Films about psychopaths and sociopaths

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 September 17#Category:Found footage films about psychopaths and sociopaths. These cats were created by the same user who created that one. As I stated there, apparently it wasn't filled with great care. Even ignoring that, I see a few issues. "sociopaths" and "sociopathy" are not present in the category system outside of these cats. The term redirects to Psychopathy#Sociopathy, and is considered outdated and overlapping with Psychopathy or Antisocial personality disorder.
Psychopathy is also not significantly present in the category system outside of these and Category:Psychopathy, Category:Psychopathy writers, Category:Psychopathy scales, Category:Books about psychopathy and Category:Psychopathy self-report inventories. So what determines inclusion here? Certainly there isn't a consistent diagnosis in fiction that we can realistically contain these categories to. I see these categories basically being used as "Films about crazy people". And probably most of the time being used in a way that overlaps with Films about murderers, Serial killer films and Films about torture. And with "sociopath" in the title, I can also see it being used to overlap with Films about borderline personality disorder and films with characters vaguely exhibiting antisocial behavior or narcissism. Or even overlapping as far as Films about obsessive–compulsive disorder or for films about paranoid types. That seems problematic and ultimately not a good categorization. What do we think? Οἶδα (talk) 20:27, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete The same original research issues that led to the deletion of Category:Fictional characters with antisocial personality disorder at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_January_3#Category:Fictional_characters_with_antisocial_personality_disorder. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:45, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
I also notice Category:Films about psychopaths was deleted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 30#Category:Films about psychopaths, where Marcocapelle made the same points. As alluded to there, other precedent supposedly exists.
So I went looking:
Οἶδα (talk) 18:27, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Speedy delete per G4, then. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:28, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:U.S. road articles needing KML

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Expand unclear abbreviation. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:11, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose because the abbreviation is commonly used and also used for Category:Canada road transport articles without KML and Category:Australia road articles without KML. X5163x (talk) 20:26, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose—KML is a standard abbreviation. Imzadi 1979 → 00:16, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose due to widespread use of abbreviation, like the BBC. --Minoa (talk) 14:52, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

1st-millenium establishments in Armenia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Sparsely populated categories per WP:OCYEAR. Boots the Blackfoot Ferret 18:51, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. Note that the 10th century is part of the 1st millennium (not BC). X5163x (talk) 20:01, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Merge per nom, but I think Armenia is considered a borderline country between Europe and Asia, together with Azerbaijan, Georgia and Cyprus. If that is the case it should be a triple merge instead of a dual merge. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:34, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Stage plays directed by Quentin Tarantino

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Plays have been written by Quentin Tarantino, irrelevant whether he directed them as well. Also in line with standard naming conventions for playwrights. Blethering Scot 17:33, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support: I agree with the naming change and the rationale behind it. CANthony0125 (talk) 17:35, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
To confirm I propose :Propose deleting Category:Stage plays directed by Quentin Tarantino and Propose renaming Category:Stage plays written by Quentin Tarantino to Category:Plays by Quentin Tarantino. No need for the two catergories for same articles and rename is standard naming convention.Blethering Scot 17:40, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
I completely support that proposition. CANthony0125 (talk) 17:45, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Assuming this is okay Blethering Scot, I would like to revert your tagging of Category:Stage plays written by Quentin Tarantino because that should be speedy renamed in alignment with other categories of Category:Plays by American writers. Οἶδα (talk) 19:33, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Nevermind. I now realise CANthony0125 created the category. With their support, we should be allowed to Speedy delete per G7 and Speedy rename per WP:C2E. Οἶδα (talk) 19:42, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Speedy both per my comment above. We do not categorize plays by director. The only such cat I can find is the isolated Category:Plays originally directed by Garson Kanin, which should be deleted. Οἶδα (talk) 21:15, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
The missing header has been added. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:31, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Aramaicists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Aramaists is the most common English term for scholars specializing in Aramaic studies. (See also on Ngram.) The word Aramaist is formed like Hebraist and Arabist, for which we have Category:Hebraists and Category:Arabists, not Category:Hebraicists nor Category:Arabicists. Auteuil-Passy (talk) 07:11, 22 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 02:57, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply

September 29

[edit]

Category:Poems about Mermaids

[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. Staraction (talk · contribs) 07:32, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Per Naming conventions (WP:CATNAME) – User:itsirlpidge (talk) 11:51, 29 September 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.

Subcategories of Category:U.S. road articles needing KML

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This category and all of its subcategories are empty. New articles in this category can be directly added to the parent category. X5163x (talk) 23:39, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete all as unlikely to be used much in the future. Is "KML" supposed to be the Keyhole Markup Language? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 12:02, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Yes, according to Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Maps task force. X5163x (talk) 20:06, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2026_September_30#Category:U.S._road_articles_needing_KML to rename. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:13, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose—these are supposed to be maintenance categories for each task force under the project. The banner template is supposed to categorize an article lacking a KML file on Wikipedia, and it's supposed to categorize by the task forces. As maintenance categories, they may be empty at any given time, but that doesn't mean they aren't useful. Imzadi 1979 → 00:17, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Former cities

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: It is not helpful to segregate this category system into "cities" and "towns". –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:04, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Merge cities, towns and villages all three. This threefold distinction is subjective in many countries and former countries. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:05, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    Added to nomination. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:16, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Merge The split between these three is different in different jurisdictions. Plus some populated places change status over time. There are other names besides these three appliee to populated places in some jurisdictions. In the end this boils down to categorization by shared name not shared trait. I am also not sure it is always easy to decide which designations of populated places in some non-English-speaking countries are equivalrnt to which designations in English.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:24, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Ruined cities

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Created two years ago, still barely populated. Covered by the more specific cats at Category:Ruins . Gotitbro (talk) 06:32, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Created by a now blocked editor, blocked for creating inappropriate categories despite repeated warnings . Gotitbro (talk) 06:34, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Keep and populate I don't think this matches any existing subcategory of Category:Ruins. It should be very easy to search the subcategories for Middle Eastern countries, in particular. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:56, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Merge to subcategories of Category:Former populated places as completely overlapping. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:59, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Actually, no, that doesn't quite match, either, since that could include former polities like East Berlin that are now part of a larger city. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:01, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Green bans

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: per WP:NONDEFINING and the spirit of WP:C1, an empty category
In Australia, the Builders Labourers Federation used to launch Green ban work stoppages to stop construction projects that created environmental or social harm. This category would be fine if it contained articles specifically about green bans, but it doesn't contain a single one. Instead it has articles about buildings or towns that were the site of a green ban protest at some point in the 1970s, like the Bellevue Hotel, Brisbane or Redfern, New South Wales. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:18, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Formula One tyre suppliers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: per WP:TRIVIALCAT, WP:NONDEFINING, and the spirit of WP:PERFCAT
This category would be fine if it contained articles about boutique firms that make tires/tyres specifically for Formula One. Instead it has articles about major companies that have lots of customers, like Michelin and Goodyear. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:18, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Academic staff of Karpagam Academy of Higher Education

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 01:15, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply

September 28

[edit]

Category:Páramo flora

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Rename to follow the established pattern – "flora of x" – for flora categories, including the parent category Category:Flora of the Andes. Tom Radulovich (talk) 23:33, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Regionally Important Geological/Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per MOS:/ and the unnecessary abbreviation. Rename child categories as well. Gjs238 (talk) 22:09, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Films based on Sino-Indian wars and conflicts

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT duplicating the pre-existing Category:Sino-Indian War films. Both films in this category are already in that category. Created by a sockpuppet. Οἶδα (talk) 21:48, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

1110s establishments in England

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Sparsely populated categories per WP:NARROWCAT and WP:OCYEAR. Boots the Blackfoot Ferret 20:22, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) in Cumbria

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: As per scheme used in Category:Regionally Important Geological/Geomorphological Sites (RIGS), erroneous duplication of Category:Regionally Important Geological/Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) in Cumbria. Gjs238 (talk) 12:33, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Rename to Category:Regionally important geological and geomorphological sites in Cumbria per MOS:/ and the unnecessary abbreviation. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:19, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Zamindaris

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Conflates zamindars, individual aristocrats, with their estates, or zamindaris. "Estate" is redundant in this case. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:47, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Zamindars of Madhepura

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Two articles about people from a district that is in present-day Bihar. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:44, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:12th-century Welsh historians

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 03:27, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Zamindars of Bengal

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: "Zamindars of Bengal" was created in June, and is redundant to "Bengali zamindars" created in 2009. Both categories contain articles on the feudal lords and on the estates, and neither title presently disambiguates bio articles from estate articles. ~2026-52288-72 (talk) 02:39, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Reverse merge matching main article title, Zamindars of Bengal. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:34, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Actually, merge both to Category:Zamindaris of Bengal because the contents are overwhelmingly about estates, not individuals. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:37, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Actually, make that Category:Zamindars and zamidaris of Bengal. Another nomination is upcoming. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:40, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:12th-century mosques in Egypt

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Anachronistic, see Category:12th-century establishments in Egypt being a dab page. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:13, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:17th-century Iranian astronomers

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 02:11, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Lower house elections in the Philippines

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Most of these are Philippine House of Representatives elections anyway. Elections to the Philippine Assembly can be moved to a separate category. HueMan1 (talk) 01:01, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

September 27

[edit]

Category:Wikipedians who use PipeWire

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:USERCAT for lacking any discernible collaborative function. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:03, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete, I didn't understand and I thought all userboxes needed a specific category. My bad paidlowered (talk|contrib) 22:14, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Italian exonyms

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: One member category, which was only "kept" at AfD as no consensus. No need to merge, article is already in italian language and list of exonyms categories. ScalarFactor (talk) 19:30, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Catholicism in television

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:36, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Western (genre) television series featuring gimmick weapons

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: It took me a second to understand exactly what this category is for. It was created in 2018 on the basis of this unsourced section at Johnny Ringo (TV series), as illustrated by the fact that the category creator copied and pasted that section as the category's explanation. That appears to have been WP:OR and has now been removed from the article. This category is for shows where the main character has a gun that has been customized to make it more effective. And because it is thus superior to other guns, it could be described as a gimmick. But a lot of film & tv characters have some sort of distinctive gimmick or recurring piece of equipment. As a fan of these old Westerns, I also believe the category heavily implies that the weapon is the main reason behind the character's success. But in the The Rifleman, for example, the protagonist is widely known for his exceptional skill as a sharpshooter. His modified Winchester is a distinctive feature of his character, but not exactly the secret sauce behind what makes him effective. Otherwise, this is nothing more than a "TV series featuring distinctive weapons" category. But it's not. It's moreso something that belongs on TV Tropes than as a Wikipedia category. "The protagonist has a specially modified weapon that gives them an advantage" is quite a large scope that is not limited to Western TV shows. But there really isn't any amount of reliable source coverage that clearly establishes "gimmick guns" as a concept nor any that reference these shows together as sharing that trait. Having a cool, unique, powerful signature weapon is not a meaningful categorization of TV shows. Οἶδα (talk) 05:54, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete as WP:NEO. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:58, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Incels

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The current Incel page under the subsection "incelosphere lexicology" says one of the senses of the word incel is an insult. This means the current category violates Wikipedia's WP:NPA policy as well as its WP:BLP guidelines. This can be averted by using the much more mild term "incelosphere" which is not associated with being an insult nor is it derogatory, but it gets the same message across. ~2026-48322-42 (talk) 17:11, 4 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We have agreement to do something but no agreement on what to do
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 05:11, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Events affected by the organized criminal group of Ilan Shor

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:ASSOC. User:Namiba 16:13, 2 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose. WP:ASSOC: The problem with saying that something is "associated" with something else, is that it can be a #SUBJECTIVE and vague determination. But there is no subjectivity here, people have been convicted in Moldova or sanctioned internationally (including by the EU) for "affecting" the topics in the category. It's about vote-buying, illegal party financing and the organization of paid protests by a precise criminal group. See the category Category:Convicted or sanctioned people related to Ilan Shor for a (n incomplete) list of individuals who have been convicted or sanctioned for such activities, all of this respectively cited to reliable sources. And yes, association with Ilan Shor is frequently if not every time explicitly mentioned in their cases (an example: Today's listings include members of successor entities to the outlawed ȘOR political party and close associates of the EU-listed Ilan Shor. This is a press release by the European Council announcing new sanctions for individuals in Moldova ).
WP:ASSOC: However, it may be appropriate to have categories whose title clearly conveys a specific and defined relationship to a specific subject, such as Category:Obama family or Category:Obama administration personnel. "organized criminal group" is an existing concept present in the criminal code of Moldova (Art. 46, p. 25), and so is it a wording choice used in Moldovan and foreign media , as well as by Moldovan law enforcement entities and officials . The topics present in the category were affected by the actions of the organized criminal group of which Ilan Shor is the head figure. See also this comment of mine here for further context information .
The nominated category does not violate WP:ASSOC in any way. Super Ψ Dro 16:47, 2 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Well, it's four articles on elections that got foreign interference through this group, and a set of protests of which a large part were paid. I would call that defining, especially considering never had Moldovan politics (and rarely Moldova in general) gotten so much foreign attention. Are you suggesting a list article? That would surely not be notable. There is only one missing article in that category (actually in this election they pulled it through unlawful ways, that are still under investigaton today), as I haven't gotten around writing about it yet. But it would be a short list article. Maybe I am misunderstanding you. Super Ψ Dro 21:30, 2 September 2026 (UTC)reply
At the very least, we would need to wait for all criminal investigations and proceedings to finish so we know the actual list of people belonging to it. And probably wait a bit more for enough high-quality sources to appear to prove the topic's notability with more ease. Meanwhile, I see no harm in maintaining this category. WP:ASSOC does not seem applicable (if so, please refute my comment above), so what policy justifies this? Super Ψ Dro 10:56, 3 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 05:04, 27 September 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
  • Weak support. To a non-astronomer, these codes are very opaque and don't give any intuition about the categorized stars. Chemically peculiar star suggests that Ap (and, presumably Bp) stars are uniquely magnetic. As an alternative what about Category:Magnetic chemically peculiar stars (see )? I'd also support renaming the main article to match. pburka (talk) 18:33, 30 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: thoughts also on the alternative proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 22:58, 31 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 05:02, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:DY Persei variables

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only five are known in the Milky Way, including the prototype DY Persei, and only the prototype has its own article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:40, 20 July 2026 (UTC)reply
But DY Persei is unrelated to R Coronae Borealis Variable. So, I think it is not best move to do Abdullah1099 (talk) 03:52, 26 July 2026 (UTC)reply
We don't know that for sure. Would it then be merged to Category:Eruptive variables or Category:Pulsating variables? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:26, 26 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 22:49, 31 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Where to merge to?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 05:02, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Early Germanic people

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Judging from the contents, this seems like arguably the identical scope, or am I missing something?. ~2026-36527-94 (talk) 13:46, 24 June 2026 (UTC)reply
Keep afaik, the people category is for individual humans, the peoples category is for ethnic groups. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:26, 24 June 2026 (UTC)reply
Rename and clean up per below. PARAKANYAA (talk) 16:47, 4 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep, or rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ASUKITE 13:14, 4 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) 18:44, 31 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Rename, per PARAKANYAA and Marcocapelle. Boots the Blackfoot Ferret 18:53, 31 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Tagging Category:Early Germanic peoples as would be required for the "rename and clean up" proposal that's the current consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 05:01, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Districts by London Plan classification

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I am nominating this category and its subcategories Category: International centres of London, Category:Metropolitan centres of London, Category:Major centres of London, Category:District centres of London.

In general I think categorising things based on their London Plan classification is quite dubious. Reading this Prospect article (https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/essays/51484/boris-has-failed), it says things like "So depending on which document you read, Johnson is sponsoring anything from 19 to 43 priority areas for development". This set of categories is not about opportunity areas or priority areas for development, this is about a third type of classification (in the 2021 version of the London Plan, it is referred to as "network classification"), not mentioned in the quote, however, I think the entire thing is questionable. Different iterations of the London Plan move pages between tiers, and when you read the most recent iteration of the London Plan, you see several different systems of classification operating simultaneously (see https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/the_london_plan_2021.pdf). Other classifications are "Night-time economy classification", "Strategic area for regeneration", "Commercial growth potential", among others.

I think this is a pretty clear example of Wikipedia:Overcategorization. Specifically Wikipedia:Overcategorization#Trivial characteristics and wikipedia:Overcategorization#Non-defining characteristics. The fact that there are so many different distinct classification systems in this one document makes each one more trivial and non-defining.

Additionally. It seems strange to use phrases like "Major centres of London", but which are quite subjective, and are only somewhat objectively defined by this one document. It's a little bit like Wikipedia:Overcategorization#Published list. This is one government document and is not exactly like an article, however in combination with the other reasons (triviality, non-definingness), I think it should definitely be a factor. UrbaniteMunicipalist (talk) 21:25, 30 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Sorry
I would like to include Category:Major centres of London. UrbaniteMunicipalist (talk) 22:04, 30 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Taggng the subcats
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 04:58, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Television stations in the United States by state

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Per naming conventions Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:52, 14 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shocksingularity (talk) 23:21, 26 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Putting this together with the overlapping #Category:Television stations in insular areas of the United States
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 04:38, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Television stations in insular areas of the United States

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Empty category; subcats now sorted by state Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:54, 14 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:05, 24 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Puttng this together with the overlapping #Category:Television stations in the United States by state
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 04:37, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:GMMTV male actors

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Empty category is redundant when there is already Category:GMMTV actors and the subcategory Category:GMMTV actresses.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shocksingularity (talk) 23:15, 26 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Putting this together with the overlapping Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2026_September_27#Thai_actors_by_agency
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 04:32, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Films directed by L. G. Ravichandran

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The parent article was rightly renamed per and . Kailash29792 (talk) 00:21, 17 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 02:35, 25 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Comment: Speedy rename possibly? Shocksingularity (talk) 21:00, 4 September 2026 (UTC)reply
No because the bold move of the article appears to have been in the wrong destination. Οἶδα (talk) 05:14, 5 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Pending the move request
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 04:21, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Moved to L. G. Ravichandar. Οἶδα (talk) 20:04, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Through the Dragon's Eye

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: The only thing in here is a single redirect. The article was converted to a redirect in this edit 8 months ago, due to a lack of notability. (It shouldn't need an upmerge to its other parent, Category:1980s British children's television series, because Category:Look and Read is already in that category.) – numbermaniac 15:22, 23 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on this now that the page isn't a redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 04:16, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Documentary films about Nazis

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Match new parent category (Films about Nazis was merged into Films about Nazism). PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:16, 22 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Disperse per Marcocapelle. Shocksingularity (talk) 23:58, 25 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 04:14, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Years in the Faroe Islands

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, mostly one- or two-articles categories, this is not helpful for navigation. As home rule started in 1948, I guess after 1948 the merge targets should become Europe instead of Denmark. But we can also leave it at Denmark. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:27, 22 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 04:14, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Comics about anthropomorphic plants

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Almost all entries are malplaced, and the remainder does not merit its own independent category. WP:NARROWCAT. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:46, 22 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Alternative proposal, why not rename to Comics about plants? It seems like the issue is anthropomorphic, which I agree does not fit with a number of the current categories but most would fit in Comics about plants. There's also at least five other entries I can think of to add to such a category. WinstonDewey (talk) 16:22, 26 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 04:12, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Thai actors by agency

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Basically a roundabout form of WP:PERFCAT. These are all hybrid talent agency/production company/tv network organizations that recruit actors and find or create opportunities for them. Building on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 August 17#Category:GMMTV male actors, which is instead focused on that category's emptiness. As I stated there, this is not analogous to, say, Category:Recording artists by label, for example. Musical artists are the individual creators of albums/EPs/singles and their labels organise and release those works. Actors are just one of many people involved in film/television projects. They are not the creators of the works they appear in. Actors by talent agency is not defining. This would be like if William Morris Endeavor was also a production company and we grouped all its signees together.
Channel 3 HD (Thailand) actors can be speedy deleted per G4 because of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 1#Category:Actors under Channel 3 (Thailand) and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 December 6#Category:Actors under Channel 3 (Thailand). Οἶδα (talk) 03:32, 22 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Delete per precedent. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:36, 22 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  • I'm leaning towards keep, considering that the way the Thai entertainment industry works, actors often stay signed with the same company throughout their entire careers so it's a defining aspect for them. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:55, 23 August 2026 (UTC)reply
    The nature of the Thai entertainment industry may make the relationship more significant, but it does not actually change the underlying WP:PERFCAT issue. The whole entire reason these actors could be said to be commonly and consistently referred to in reliable sources (i.e. WP:DEFINING) as being signed to these companies is because said companies produce content for them to star in. That is a WP:PERFCAT because the categories are effectively grouping performers based on their participation in the productions associated with these companies. We wouldn't even be having this conversation right now if that wasn't the case. It would be no different if CAA operated its own ecosystem of film/television productions and routinely cast Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise, George Clooney, etc in them. We would not create Category:Creative Artists Agency actors on the basis of their ongoing appearances in CAA's productions. Because, again, actors are just one of many people involved in film/television projects. They are not the creators of the works they appear in. Actors by talent agency/production company is textbook overcategorization no matter which way you cut it. Οἶδα (talk) 19:39, 23 August 2026 (UTC)reply
    I don't really follow that these fall within the realm of PERFCAT; they're more of an association by employment, and quite comparable to Category:American film actors by studio, which has hundreds of biographies under it. (Not that Other Stuff Exists is reason for keeping, but at first I was rather unsure about this case given the lack of other similar groupings. The existence of the American film actors category pushes me towards a more solid keep.) --Paul_012 (talk) 05:41, 28 August 2026 (UTC)reply
    Because their "employment" is fundamentally their performances in productions, which is the entire realm of WP:PERFCAT. Again, we wouldn't be having this discussion if these contracts weren't tied to performances. The categories are essentially functioning as Actors who performed in productions made by X, rather than merely Actors who signed employment contracts with X. The contractual relationship itself is not the defining characteristic. And PERFCAT is textbook overcategorization anyway. And again, actors are just one of many people involved in film/television projects. So it's not comparable to Recording artists by label.
    And yes, Category:American film actors by studio should be deleted as well. I cannot find any evidence of CfD ever upholding the existence of those categories. If you actually look through the articles in those categories you will find that it is wildly inconsistent and often completely unverifiable, violating WP:CATV. For example, Barbara Stanwyck is currently categorized into Columbia Pictures contract players, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer contract players and Paramount Pictures contract players. I cannot find any such text in the article to confirm any of those. It also seems to contradict the fact that she appears to have never actually signed a longterm exclusive contract with any studios. And as this journal article points out, "contracts" can inlude non-exclusive, short-term contracts, or non-exclusive contracts for an x number of pictures for a particular studio, all of which is understood as being no different than freelancing. Even ignoring the verification issues, there's the impracticality of keeping these categories contained to the meaningful contractual relationships only. But as Johnpacklambert stated at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 December 6#Category:Actors under Channel 3 (Thailand), it is too easy for actors to work for multiple agencies across a career for this to be a truly defining trait. As stated at Cary Grant and Columbia Pictures, Cary Grant signed a 5-year contract with Paramount, followed by a contract with Columbia in 1937, which was soon after altered to a non-exclusive contract shared with RKO. How is any of that truly meaningful to represent in the form of categorization? If the contractual relationship itself is what is supposed to define these categories, then these distinctions seem rather arbitrary. Why should a five-year exclusive contract, a subsequent non-exclusive contract, and a shared contract with another studio all translate into essentially the same categorical treatment? The better way of representing "major contract players of [X] studio" during the Golden Age of Hollywood' studio system would be to do so in the respective studio articles (which is already the case in some articles) or to make it a list article. And not to belabor the point, but actors were not the only people under contract to studios during that time. There were long-term contracts with many kinds of creative and technical personnel. Οἶδα (talk) 23:26, 31 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 04:12, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:German Football Association national teams

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant, there is no reason this category is necessary alongside Category:Germany national football teams. In 99% of cases the articles within both category trees will be identical. S.A. Julio (talk) 08:26, 21 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Keep: The association that run national teams need to be mentioned in the categories in some way. The category is mainly an extension for Category:German Football Association. This is also why its a non-diffusing subcategory to Category:Germany national football teams because it will most likely appear the same. FastCube (talk) 09:41, 21 August 2026 (UTC)reply
If that is so important, why not add Category:Germany national football teams to Category:German Football Association? Why on earth would we need two separate category systems for a nearly identical scope? S.A. Julio (talk) 09:46, 21 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Not every national team is run by its own national FA (e.g. England national beach soccer team is run by England Beach Soccer instead of the FA; Azerbaijan national minifootball team is run by the Azerbaijan Minifootball Federation instead of AFFA). In any case (and to again address your question), these categories are separate to accommodate both sides (the teams and the association). Even if all the national teams are run by a national FA, this comes back to the defense of classifying them as non-diffusing subcategories; where there's no diffusion but at least a characteristic of interest. FastCube (talk) 06:41, 22 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 04:11, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Fictional characters with plant abilities

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Suffers from WP:ARBITRARYCAT and WP:SUBJECTIVECAT issues due to the vague nature of this category. It can include plant characters with control over themselves or non-plant characters with control over plants. No indication being a "chlorokinetic" is defining for most characters. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:19, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 03:20, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Fictional characters who can control animals

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Suffers from issues of WP:SUBJECTIVECAT as to what actually counts as animal control. Is someone who is an expert horse rider an "animal controller"? Is someone who sends a single "you must help us!" and the animal decides to come running of its own accord an "animal controller"? Also has WP:NONDEF issues. In my opinion it should be deleted, any relevant characters who do full mind control can be merged to Category:Fictional mind controllers. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:10, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Keep - Several clear cut cases of WP:DEFINING here such as Ant-Man and Aquaman. Stuff like horse riding obviously does not fit the category. (Oinkers42) (talk) 22:12, 22 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 03:20, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Curacao Neptunus players

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Removing sponsor from team name, in line with page for team page, Neptunus HonkBase (talk) 13:42, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 03:20, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:DOOR Neptunus players

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Removing FORMER sponsor of team name, again, in line with Neptunus. Note: there are a few other merges/name changes for Category:Honkbal Hoofdklasse players by team subcategories that I think would be beneficial for similar reasons HonkBase (talk) 13:42, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 03:19, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

September 26

[edit]

Category:Collection of the Crime Museum

[edit]
Convert Category:Collection of the Crime Museum to article Collection of the Crime Museum
Nominator's rationale: Most of these pages aren't collections, they;re actual criminals. I don't think that this category should exist in its present form. Perhaps a list? SMasonGarrison 23:52, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:American LaVeyan Satanists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Is the nationality really the relevant bit here? Sure, the CoS is mostly American, but Gavin Baddeley and Marc Almond are British LaVeyan Satanists and it is a bit awkward to have 1 category that excludes them. Alternatively we could rename this "Church of Satan members" as this is basically what this is. I guess theoretically it would be possible to adhere to LaVey's type of Satanism without actually being a CoS member but if there are any cases of that we don't have articles on them. I checked every entry and all of them were CoS members, except for one where it didn't even say anything about LaVey, which I removed, and Jayne Mansfield, where it is probably a myth, that I also removed. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:09, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Youth football categories pt.2 (cf. September 14 discussion)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There was already a consensus on September 14 to eliminate categories of this kind, but my CSD got declined (I think there need have been some common sense). Wikipediæ philosophia (talk) 21:13, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Natural rights

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created category redundant with Category:Fundamental rights. Gjs238 (talk) 00:53, 20 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Four of the six articles are currently not in Category:Fundamental rights. Do they really belong there? There is also Natural law and Category:Natural law so this is a bit confusing to me. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:11, 20 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Comment. Hi there. I am the creator of this category. I think it would be important for my fellow editors to read Fundamental rights and Natural law. Natural rights are distinct from "fundamental rights" and "natural law". Several of the specific rights enumerated on the "fundamental rights" page are not natural rights, for example: the right to receive an education and the right to be free from discrimination on the basis of any number of characteristics. While there are some who use the terms natural law and natural rights synonymously, this does not reflect how the terms are used in reliable sources, law schools, and philosophical circles e.g. . Are they related? Yes, but they are not the same thing. I urge you to keep this category, if not just for law students and burgeoning liberal philosophers. Redvelvetvanilaaaaaaaaa (talk) 17:27, 20 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on this now that Natural rights exists?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 21:06, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Crafty guitarists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: This doesn't seem to be defining to have learned guitar via specifical classes. SMasonGarrison 21:05, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Uncontainerize American people of Scottish descent and American people of Welsh descent

[edit]

(Added by * Pppery * it has begun... 21:03, 26 September 2026 (UTC): Also being discussed here is a proposal to contanerize Category:American people of English descent )reply

There are far fewer American people of Scottish descent than British or English in the U.S. (Scottish multiple ancestry nationwide 5,038,88, single ancestry 1,542,067). The numbers for English ancestry are 19,110,456 and 11,906,819, respectively; German ancestry 27,690,518 and 12,527,510; Irish ancestry 24,128,137 and 8,264,444. I don't have the stats for Welsh descent because the census bureau page won't load, but Wales's population is smaller than Scotland's. Space4TCatHerder🖖 17:48, 19 August 2026 (UTC)reply
The banner at the top of container categories reads, "This is a container category. Due to its scope, it should contain only subcategories." "Scope" in this case doesn't apply. Five million people with some Scottish ancestry out of 340 million (i.e., 1.47% of the population) does not qualify for concluding that "nearly everyone in the U.S. will have some Scottish ancestry". Space4TCatHerder🖖 18:11, 19 August 2026 (UTC) Amended. Space4TCatHerder🖖 18:31, 24 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Strong Support Both see WP:ETHNICRACECAT and Wikipedia:Category names#Descent. For many people, ethnicity does have an impact on what religion they are part of, and other stuff they participate in in their story. Unlike other categories that would be purely non defining on people with no relevance or usefulness whatsoever, like hobbies like cooking, skiing, golfing, swimming ETC, ancestry is a basic fact that no one can change, and is basically what someone is at birth. To be fair, I would heavily recommend to read WP:EGRSD. I think there needs to be more discussion because there is a huge difference between ancestry, religion and all the others I mentioned ETC. Servite et contribuere (talk) 09:09, 20 August 2026 (UTC)reply
I also believe containerizing is too much of a one size fits all approach. Servite et contribuere (talk) 09:43, 20 August 2026 (UTC)reply
@Johnpacklambert: I don't usually get involved in categories, so I (and, judging by other back-and-forth editing I've seen, other editors, as well) wasn't aware that "CATEGORY:something" could be either a category or a container category. Why this confusing double meaning? All these misunderstandings could be avoided by calling the container category CONTAINER or CONTAINERCATEGORY or s.th. other than category. Space4TCatHerder🖖 18:11, 20 August 2026 (UTC)reply
      • You are probably right that there should be a more clear way to label that a category is a container category. Categories have at times complex rules. At times if you misunderstand them people attack you very viciously and at times very publicly for how you applied them. Some editors still hold against me edits I made in 2013 based on not understanding the very complex rules that we have about which sub-categories diffuse and which do not. What makes that worse, is that what we actually do is not even fully spelled out in the long written rules. The written rules that I misapplied say that we do not diffuse say American women writers from American writers, and we never diffuse based on Ethnicity, gender, sexuality, or religion. The rules as written say that we do however diffuse sports players by gender in cases where the leagues are by gender. However the lived reality is we also diffuse actresses and male actors fully by gender. I believe the same as functioning actually applies to opera singers, but maybe not to all singers. In some ways the requirement that categories need to be defining to the individual is the same way. It works with occupations for the most part. If someone is known as a singer, made a living as a singer, had a paid job as a singer than that is defining. If they sang in a high school stage production, and never since, than that is almost certainly not defining. The one exception is if someone recorded that high school singing by them and it was widely reported on. However this does not work for sorting if ancestry is defining. Part of me questions if ancestry, as opposed to place of birth, or actually accepted ethnicity, is defining at all. There are some cases where it is, but in far too many cases it is a trivial detail that I do not think should be categorized by. I think this applies to a lot of ancestries, but as a rule applies to all British ancestry in the US. I likewise do not think having Spanish ancestry in defining in Argentina. Any more than it would make sense to have Category:Spanish people of Spanish descent.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:52, 20 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Where do I take a proposal to change the label of container categories? Space4TCatHerder🖖 14:02, 21 August 2026 (UTC)reply
WP:NOPA. Space4TCatHerder🖖 16:48, 25 August 2026 (UTC)reply
It is not a personal attack to voice skepticism over the motives and timing of this thread when your revert flat out ignored a clearly linked consensus to not list the category in articles, and showed no concern whatsoever for that CFD outcome when seeking to maintain your preferred result by asking someone else to add it back after they had reverted you in turn. Starting a new CFD up gives the impression you either want page-specific exceptions made (which WP:LOCALCON warns against) or simply won't accept how a category isn't worth adding to an individual page. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:24, 25 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Starting a new CFD up gives the impression... That was my suggestion, for what it's worth. Chess enjoyer (talk) 00:24, 26 August 2026 (UTC)reply
In hindsight, it might have made things easier to just stick with points on WP:LOCALCON. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:21, 26 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose because British ancestry is so foundational to the US, these subcategories are redundant. In daily life, people like Donald Trump or Tyler Oliveira are perceived and discussed simply as (white) Americans, regardless of having a Scottish mom or a British surname. No one realistically views them through the lens of diaspora. Forcing these categories onto every celebrity with colonial roots adds no value. We can already see this issue playing out on List of Scottish Americans, which has devolved into a directory for any celeb with a distant colonial ancestor or a Scottish-sounding surname. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-46321-40 (talk) 17:27, 25 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Tagging Category:American people of English descent
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 21:02, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Comment already voted uncontainerize Category:American people of Scottish descent and Category:American people of Welsh descent, and I also oppose deletion of Category:American people of English descent, but would prefer containerization of this category to deletion. So basically for , my first preferred choice is Keep, my second (If we are counting/allowing like a ranked choice voting here) is to containerize, and my last choice is deletion which I have said I am against per the reasons I gave above. And I oppose per WP:ETHNICRACECAT and Wikipedia:Category names#Descent which I think way too many editors ignore. For many people, ethnicity does have an impact on what religion they are part of, and other stuff they participate in their personal story. Unlike other categories that would be purely non defining on people with no relevance or usefulness whatsoever, like hobbies like cooking, skiing, golfing, swimming ETC, ancestry is a basic fact that no one can change, and is basically what someone is at birth. To be fair, I would heavily recommend to read WP:EGRSD. I think there needs to be more discussion because there is a huge difference between ancestry, religion and all the others I mentioned ETC. And as I also mentioned, I think containerization or deletion would be a one size fits all approach rather than determining what is best for each specific page itself. Servite et contribuere (talk) 21:02, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Jewish magazines published in Australia

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created 1-article category. Merge to Category:Jewish magazines and Category:Magazines published in Australia Gjs238 (talk) 02:10, 19 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Now has 5 articles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 20:42, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Wireless

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: There is not enough distinction between these two categories for both of them to exist. Category:Wireless has most of the articles at present, but Category:Wireless communication has a clearer title. I propose that we merge all the articles there. Srleffler (talk) 04:08, 7 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 20:30, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply

I have tagged Category:Wireless communication. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:30, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply

I proposed moving the article Wireless to Wireless communication per WP:NOUN. This affects the decision between the proposed merge and the reverse merge.--Srleffler (talk) 20:55, 26 September 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
  • For sure purge angels, demons, deities and spirits subcategories. I suppose that can be done regardless of the rename, but with the rename that becomes even clearer. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:01, 31 July 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support to match main article, and clarity, as noted above. I should note though, there are human characters in fiction, who do not use any "title"', but who do use magic. But since those should be listified, I'm fine with this. - jc37 21:55, 4 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  • I should note that the disambiguation makes "Fictional" redundant. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:59, 15 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Conditional support as long as the title does not contain the word "magician" - I think that word refers chiefly to entertainers who are known for stage magic, but this does not accurately reflect what the characters in the category are known for. I feel like the wording may be too confusing if we use that word. Instead, I would support a renaming to something that expressly indicates the genre of fantasy to differentiate it from stage magicians who just happen to also be fictional characters, e.g. "Magic users in fantasy" or something like that. Of course, we should also get rid of the things that Marcocapelle suggested such as Pokemon, etc. Also, if this is renamed then Category:Fictional characters who use magic by work should also be renamed. In solidarity, Gommeh (talk 🎮 sign) 17:16, 27 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think there's consensus to rename somehow here, but multiple conflicting proposals have been added (Category:Fictional magicians (fantasy), Category:Magicians (fantasy), some other name without "magician", etc.). Hopefully we can settle on one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 18:21, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose per rationale of Srleffer. And I also disagree with the idea it fails WP:NONDEF. There are so many fictional characters noted for their use of Magic. Elsa (Frozen) is one of the best examples as she is known for her magic abilities to generate ice and snow, and control weather ETC. No option on Fictional magic-users, but it seems like a bit of a weird title for a category page as it makes it seem that's the only thing they are noted for, or all they do ETC. Servite et contribuere (talk) 21:06, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Johannes Cornelisz Verspronck

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: per WP:OCEPON, unnecessary eponymous category. 1857a (talk) 18:49, 22 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 18:17, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Statues of fictional characters

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Hi, I want to propose renaming this category from "Statues of fictional characters" to "Sculptures of fictional characters". In its current form, the name technically excludes sculptures of fictional characters that are not statues (like busts, reliefs, ect), of which there are currently a few in this category, and I'm sure there are countless examples all around the world not yet included on Wikipedia. Artemis Andromeda (talk) 13:34, 26 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Category:Fictional characters with accelerated healing

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Do you have hemophilia? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:46, 11 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 07:54, 26 September 2026 (UTC) reply

Category:Advergaming

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Advergaming is already covered in Category:Advergames making this category redundant, and the rest of it overlaps with Category:Video game marketing. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:35, 27 August 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 02:17, 4 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 06:08, 26 September 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"