Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Current female national leaders

Category:Current female...

 * The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


 * The result of the discussion was: rename/merge per nom.  Precedent on "current leaders" cats is not clear, some keep, some delete, but precedent on "current" cats is, as is rough consensus here.  I agree with the comments on lists, that they can and should be more useful than they are, and as such, will not be listifying these.  If anyone else wants to and needs the list of articles, please contact me. Kbdank71 13:48, 30 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Suggest renaming Category:Current female national leaders to Category:Female national leaders
 * Suggest merging Category:Current female heads of state to Category:Female heads of state
 * Suggest merging Category:Current female heads of government to Category:Female heads of government
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename this and merge the other two - per consensus against maintaining current and former distinctions in these sorts of categories. Otto4711 (talk) 16:06, 24 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Support - the nom's rationale is impeccable. Occuli (talk) 19:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep In fact concensus has always rightly made an exception for these head of state/government categories: here, and especially here No reason to change. We still have Category:Current national leaders and monarchs, although current US governors was deleted.  The main argument against "current" categories is maintenance, which is much less of an issue with these high-profile cats. Johnbod (talk) 20:13, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware of those earlier CFDs that you referenced. How do you feel about Category:Current female United States Senators, which is on the verge of being deleted? Wouldn't these be much better handled with lists? Cgingold (talk) 23:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Too late! But I don't mind those. I do think national leaders worth keeping as they are. The trouble with lists is they tend not to be linked to on member's articles, so no-one ever realizes they are there. They are far from the cure-all some here believe. Johnbod (talk) 23:01, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I concur with your somewhat jaundiced take on the usefulness of lists. Cgingold (talk) 04:58, 30 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. There has been quite a bit of recent precedent for not having "current" categories for lower politicians. I agree that these "current leader" categories should definitely be maintained by lists, not categories. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.