Category talk:Eastern Romance people

Opposed speedy move request

 * Category:Eastern Romance people to Category:Eastern Romance peoples and also related categories:
 * Category:Eastern Romance people in Greece to Category:Eastern Romance peoples in Greece
 * Category:History of Eastern Romance people to Category:History of the Eastern Romance peoples
 * Per C2A, the Eastern Romance peoples are not a single ethnic group, it is a term used to group the four Romance ethnic groups of Eastern Europe (Romanians among them). Therefore, the correct term would be "peoples" rather than "people" as we talk about a bunch of ethnicities. Note that although there have already been disputes in Wikipedia regarding whether the Romance peoples exist or not, the Eastern Romance peoples are undoubtedly related to each other, so it is not a made up or inaccurate name. Super   Ψ   Dro  17:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose speedy. These categories are a mixture of too many different things, so that a full discussion and even deletion are in order. It uses what is primarily a linguistic family as an ethnic designation, but includes the entire and  regardless of ethnicity. It also uses challengeable 19th-century classifications of peoples in a complete anachronistic way (?) or for people which can hardly be considered as primarily Eastern Romance (?). Usually people categories will be separate from topic categories per WP:COPSEP, but this is a complete mess. Note that the main article is Eastern Romance languages, so we may have a target named after that per WP:C2D, such as  or . Place Clichy (talk) 11:35, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The only pages that were excessive were a few, which I have already removed. As already stated, the peoples (peoples as in "ethnicities", not biographies) under that category are related, and Wikipedia needs such a category to serve as a "bridge" between these peoples. I can't think of a better name than this, so I don't see any problem. Of course the category includes and, which else could it be? A category named "ethnic Romanians" or something like that would be completely useless and inefficient. Romania's non-Romanian minorities already have their own categories (, , etc.). This practice is completely normal in Wikipedia, you can see it in  or . A separate category for biographies is completely impractical, as anyone could be covered under  or similar.  Super   Ψ   Dro  14:12, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Categories of people by modern country should probably not be in any ethnic category tree, as most modern countries are multiethnic or multicultural to some extent and consider their nationals independently of any ethnic definition. Romania in particular is one of the most multiethnic countries of Europe, and is for nationals of Romania, which includes Hungarian, Saxon, Romani, Jewish, Hutsul, Armenian and other ethnic identities. I agree indeed that an ethnic Romanian category would not bring anything. Germanic ethnic categories should certainly not be used as an example for anything, except for a deplorable drift by a very small number of users to try and apply anachronistic ethnic concepts everywhere with a very concerning agenda. Any way, I think a full discussion at CFD would help to define any possible scope for the categories nominated above. Place Clichy (talk) 13:33, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * would you still want to nominate this for full discussion? Marcocapelle (talk) 10:43, 5 February 2021 (UTC)