Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 December 20



Category:Intersexuality in fiction

 * 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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Intersexuality in fiction to  Category:Intersex in fiction
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. As per nomination below about Category:Intersexuality, this change would bring the category name into line with the key article in the field, intersex. Please note separate nomination, below, to merge Category:Novels about intersexuality‎ with  Category:Intersexuality in fiction. Nsw2042 (talk) 22:07, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:10, 20 December 2013 (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.

Category:Works about intersexuality

 * 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 to Category:Works about intersex. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:20, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose delete works about intersexuality


 * Nominator's rationale: This category contains two small categories and no pages. It is a superfluous additional layer that makes it harder for users to access the information they seek. Nsw2042 (talk) 21:57, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

The list of categories for renaming below this shows that the category could be better populated ... and removing this layer from the category hierarchy would break consistency, making it harder to navigate and harder to maintain. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:06, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep and populate, and rename to Category:Works about intersex. The name should the head article intersex.
 * Delete : More clarification as proposer: while there are a couple of relevant categories outside this category, particularly Category:Intersexuality in fiction and Category:Television works about intersex, I don't believe that there are sufficient additional pages and categories to satisfactorily populate the category. IMHO, the whole Category:Intersexuality is underpopulated and suffers from a surfeit of categories. Nsw2042 (talk) 22:13, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Procedural note. The nomination is counted as a !vote, so there is no need to say "delete" again. I have therefore struck the word "delete". -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:28, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply: Part of the reason that the categories are underpopulated is that they have been inadequately parented, so editors would have difficulty finding them. I have been adding parent categories, which should help, but this is already a viable container category, which assists navigation. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:09, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply: It would be great if Category:Intersexuality in fiction could be moved into this category also, it seems to fit given your proposal. But that would introduce a circular reference which would also need resolving. Nsw2042 (talk) 23:21, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply: I also should note that I don't agree with the fundamental problem: the categories are underpopulated primarily because material on intersex issues is scarce (and, IMHO, often regarded as non-notable). Nsw2042 (talk) 23:34, 20 December 2013 (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.

Category:Documentary films about intersexuality

 * 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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:25, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Documentary films about intersexuality to  Category:Documentary films about intersex
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. As per nomination below about Category:Intersexuality, this change would bring the category name into line with the key article in the field, intersex. Nsw2042 (talk) 21:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:57, 20 December 2013 (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.

Category:International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association

 * 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. I accept BrownHairedGirl's argument that the nomination reason is flawed, and I find no space in Wikipedia policies for the general thrust of Peterkingiron's reasoning. I also note that several of the articles mentioned as potential members are now bluelinks, so the triviality argument has not withstood the test of time. -Splash - tk 21:35, 29 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Propose delete international lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex association


 * Nominator's rationale: There is a single one item in this category, a page with the same name as the category. Seems superfluous. Nsw2042 (talk) 21:22, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

ILGA is a global organisation with regional chapter roughly corresponding to continents. There currently appears to to be no article on ILGA-Asia, ILGA-North America, ILGA-Africa, or ILGA-LAC, but there may be scope for developing those into articles. Additionally, ILGA's reports are widely studied (see over 6,000 hits on Google Books), and may themselves be the subject of encyclopedic articles. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:48, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. There are now 3 items in the category, after I added 2 just from the "see also" list on the head article, which suggests that the nominator didn't do much scrutiny.
 * I did note that, but I still don't see the relevance of the category. Maybe that's partly because of the way it out-balances other materials on specific intersex organisations. The parent category is underpopulated. Nsw2042 (talk) 23:25, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment -- Intersex is a rare physical condition where a person is partly both male and female. LGBT is a mental condition, where a person wants to be (or pretend to be) a member of the opposite sex.  These are quite different things. ILGA appears to be an attempt by the LGBT community to appropriate Intersex. Intersex people may have difficulties, because their condition is rare and contrary to the norm.  WP should not be encouraging this confusion.  We have much on LGBT, but not LGBTI band-waggoning.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:01, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment those are very subjective statements, Peterkingiron, somewhat based on conjecture, and controversial. This is not the Iris Prize. My concerns are simply whether or not it's appropriate for an organisation to have a category associated with it, and the way in which notability in the area of intersex seems most often to depend upon activity in other (related) areas. Nsw2042 (talk) 22:54, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Regardless of the merits of the association, it's just too trivial to have a category with one or two articles. Delete. Peterkingiron, please stick to the merits of the category. Bearian (talk) 23:12, 28 January 2014 (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.

Category:Novels about intersexuality‎

 * 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 to Category:Novels about intersex. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:31, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose merge Category:Novels about intersexuality‎ with  Category:Intersexuality in fiction
 * Nominator's rationale: Merge. Category:Intersexuality in fiction is already identified as underpopulated. Nsw2042 (talk) 21:09, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note there is a separate nomination to change the name of Category:Intersexuality in fiction to  Category:Intersex in fiction Nsw2042 (talk) 22:19, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, and rename to Category:Intersex in fiction Category:Novels about intersex. The category already contains 7 articles, which is a viable start for a category ... and the nomination would remove these books from any intersex-related category of novels. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:54, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Just noting that this is actually a merger, because of the separate nomination for renaming Category:Intersexuality in fiction to Category:Intersex in fiction. (In summary, Category:Intersexuality is a mess.) Nsw2042 (talk) 23:19, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oops! Wrong rename, now corrected. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:27, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, that makes sense, but then we still have an underpopulated Category:Intersex in fiction that really should contain all the pages in this category but only contains a single short story. And Category:Intersex in fiction needs to be a subcategory of Category:Works about intersex but isn't. Nsw2042 (talk) 00:31, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I just moved Category:Intersexuality in fiction to Category:Works about intersexuality (which seems logical given comments on Category:Works about intersexuality) and now it's adjacent to Category:Intersexuality literature, both of which seem to be about the same thing, and both of which contain the category Category:Novels about intersexuality‎ Nsw2042 (talk) 00:36, 21 December 2013 (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.

Category:Intersexuality literature

 * 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: at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 December 29. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Intersexuality literature to Category:Intersex in academic works
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. As per nomination below about Category:Intersexuality, this change would bring the category name into line with the key article in the field, intersex. Additionally, there is already a proposal to merge Category:Novels about intersexuality with Category: Intersexuality in fiction and the title change would help disambiguate non-fiction academic works from fiction Nsw2042 (talk) 20:52, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Rename to Category:Intersex literature. The proposed renaming is really an attempt to create a completely different category without any place in the existing category tree: there are no other categories containing the phrase "academic works". This would impede navigation, and make it harder for readers to find the books. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:04, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The suggested rename to Category:Intersex literature doesn't resolve other duplication and mis-description issues. With a rename to Category:Intersex literature it simply duplicates Category:Intersexuality in fiction and Category:Novels about intersexuality‎. It also mis-describes: the 3 pages that are in this category are all examples of non-fiction, so the current description of the category seems inappropriate. It reads, "This category should only contain literature (prose, drama and poetry) that deals with or features important Intersex characters or issues." I appreciate that my suggestion may not be the only satisfactory possible outcome, but the broader issues need attention Nsw2042 (talk) 23:14, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you misunderstand the way that the category system works as a lattice. Removing one part of that framework messes up the system and isolates material. The non-fiction pages should simply be categorised in a new category, but without removing this category. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:31, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I think I might understand it better if there wasn't so much duplication and so many sparsely populated categories. Nsw2042 (talk) 00:38, 21 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Rename to Category:Literature about intersex as the literature isn't itself intersex, and this provides consistence with "Works about intersex" and "Films about intersex". Nsw2042 (talk) 01:28, 22 December 2013 (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.

Category:Films about intersexuality

 * 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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:22, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Films about intersexuality to  Category:Films about intersex
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. As per nomination below about Category:Intersexuality, this change would bring the category name into line with the key article in the field, intersex. Nsw2042 (talk) 20:34, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:55, 20 December 2013 (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.

Category:Intersexuality

 * 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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:15, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Intersexuality to  Category:Intersex
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. The key page Intersexuality was moved to Intersex in 2010, see talk page []. The rationale is the same: terms ending in sexuality usually refer to issues of sexuality. Shifting the category would bring the related category into line with the approved shift in name of page. Nsw2042 (talk) 20:34, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Speedy rename per WP:C2D. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:55, 20 December 2013 (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.

Category:Intersex-related awards

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


 * The result of the discussion was: Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:12, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose delete intersex-related awards


 * Nominator's rationale: There is only one item in this category, which appears to have been created on 29 May 2011. The category itself is only incidental to the main theme of the single page in the category, which is a gay and lesbian film award (possibly the perceived need for the category arises from the sometime use of LGBTI as a portmanteau rather than LGBT but it's inappropriate to duplicate all LGBT categories as Intersex categories in this way). Nsw2042 (talk) 20:11, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. The sole article (Iris Prize) is not really an intersex-related award. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:25, 20 December 2013 (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.

Category:Anglican deans of the United Kingdom

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


 * The result of the discussion was: Merge. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:10, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Anglican deans of the United Kingdom to Category:Anglican deans
 * Nominator's rationale: The Anglican communion is not organised on a UK-wide basis, and its boundaries do not coincide with those of the United Kingdom. In Northern Ireland (which is part of the UK), the local Anglican denomination is the Church of Ireland, which covers the whole of the Island of Ireland -- 5/6ths of which is an independent country outside the UK.  Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:44, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Upmerge per nom. If we are to have this it should in Anglican deans in Great Britain, for reasons given by BHG.  However, the Church of England, Church in Wales, and Episcopal Church of Scotland are independent members of the Anglican Communion, so they should not be combined.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:08, 23 December 2013 (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.

Category:Pseudonymous albums

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


 * The result of the discussion was: Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:11, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Pseudonymous albums to Category:Albums published under a pseudonym
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. The current name makes it sound like the albums are pseudonymous, when it's the artist who released the album under a pseudonym. The new name would be in line with its parent, Category:Works published under a pseudonym. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 00:51, 21 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Question - are albums "published"? I would think Category:Albums recorded under a pseudonym would be correct. However, we recently deleted categories for musicians and rappers who use pseudonyms. Wouldn't every album recorded by any of the artists formerly so categorized be eligible for inclusion in this category? Does this category therefore aid in navigation by a defining characteristic? I am tending toward thinking no but can be persuaded. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 21:45, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename -- Of course, albums that are issued for sale are "published". If I have a quibble about this at all, it is that many artistes record (and publish) under a stage name, which is technically (at least) a pseudonym.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:00, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - amplifying on my previous comments, given that being a musical performer who performs under a pseudonym has been deemed not a defining characteristic of the performer it seems impossible that the same non-defining attribute can somehow be defining of those artists' product. This constitutes a back door into categorizing musicians by using pseudonyms and that door should remain closed. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 18:10, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted from CFD 2013 November 21 to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Relisting comment: Note that at CFD 2013 November 9, there was a consensus to delete both Category:Pseudonymous musicians and Category:Pseudonymous rappers


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:16, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - not a defining characteristic of an album. Oculi (talk) 19:59, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete this is too common to be worth categorizing by.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:21, 26 December 2013 (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.

Category:White House Executive Chefs

 * 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. (Minor note: I don't really follow the logic of the nomination. If they are not performers and do not have performances, then this cannot be a....!)-Splash - tk 21:31, 29 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Propose merging Category:White House Executive Chefs to Category:American chefs
 * Nominator's rationale: Chefs are not performers, but in all other respects this is a type of performers-by-performance category, as deprecated by WP:OC. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:45, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep -- This is not a performance or award category, it appears to be a job within the White House. The article lists six (from 1961),including two red-links.  If we have the articles, we should have the category.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:19, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename to Category:White House chefs. I just noticed we also have articles on some of the executive pastry chefs, and see no real reason to split the the various offices so much, especially when there seem to have been to date only three white house executive pastry chefs.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:06, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not a performance (singular or brief), but a job.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:52, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - a well-known position at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. If there is an error in who is in the category, that's for normal editing, not this discussion. Bearian (talk) 23:24, 28 January 2014 (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.

Category:1978 in Zimbabwe

 * 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. Note that not all of these were tagged, but given the history of this type of request, approval seems like a given.  It will take a while to get these done since it is a manual process. Vegaswikian (talk) 17:48, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:1978 in Zimbabwe to Category:1978 in Rhodesia


 * Category:1893 in Zimbabwe to Category:1893 in Matabeleland
 * Category:1894 in Zimbabwe to Category:1894 in Matabeleland
 * Category:1896 in Zimbabwe to Category:1896 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1897 in Zimbabwe to Category:1897 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1899 in Zimbabwe to Category:1899 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1900s in Zimbabwe to Category:1900s in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1902 in Zimbabwe to Category:1902 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1903 in Zimbabwe to Category:1903 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1905 in Zimbabwe to Category:1905 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1908 in Zimbabwe to Category:1908 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1910s in Zimbabwe to Category:1910s in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1911 in Zimbabwe to Category:1911 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1914 in Zimbabwe to Category:1914 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1919 in Zimbabwe to Category:1919 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1920s in Zimbabwe to Category:1920s in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1920 in Zimbabwe to Category:1920 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1922 in Zimbabwe to Category:1922 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1923 in Zimbabwe to Category:1923 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1924 in Zimbabwe to Category:1924 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1926 in Zimbabwe to Category:1926 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1928 in Zimbabwe to Category:1928 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1930s in Zimbabwe to Category:1930s in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1930 in Zimbabwe to Category:1930 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1931 in Zimbabwe to Category:1931 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1933 in Zimbabwe to Category:1933 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1934 in Zimbabwe to Category:1934 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1935 in Zimbabwe to Category:1935 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1936 in Zimbabwe to Category:1936 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1939 in Zimbabwe to Category:1939 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1940s in Zimbabwe to Category:1940s in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1945 in Zimbabwe to Category:1945 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1946 in Zimbabwe to Category:1946 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1947 in Zimbabwe to Category:1947 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1948 in Zimbabwe to Category:1948 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1950s in Zimbabwe to Category:1950s in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1953 in Zimbabwe to Category:1953 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1954 in Zimbabwe to Category:1954 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1957 in Zimbabwe to Category:1957 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1959 in Zimbabwe to Category:1959 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1960s in Zimbabwe to Category:1960s in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1960 in Zimbabwe to Category:1960 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1961 in Zimbabwe to Category:1961 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1962 in Zimbabwe to Category:1962 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1963 in Zimbabwe to Category:1963 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1964 in Zimbabwe to Category:1964 in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1965 in Zimbabwe to Category:1965 in Rhodesia
 * Category:1969 in Zimbabwe to Category:1969 in Rhodesia
 * Category:1970s in Zimbabwe to Category:1970s in Rhodesia
 * Category:1970 in Zimbabwe to Category:1970 in Rhodesia
 * Category:1971 in Zimbabwe to Category:1971 in Rhodesia
 * Category:1972 in Zimbabwe to Category:1972 in Rhodesia
 * Category:1973 in Zimbabwe to Category:1973 in Rhodesia
 * Category:1974 in Zimbabwe to Category:1974 in Rhodesia
 * Category:1975 in Zimbabwe to Category:1975 in Rhodesia
 * Category:1976 in Zimbabwe to Category:1976 in Rhodesia
 * Category:1977 in Zimbabwe to Category:1977 in Rhodesia
 * Category:1979 in Zimbabwe to Category:1979 in Rhodesia
 * Category:1900s establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1900s establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1903 establishments in Rhodesia to Category:1903 establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1920s establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1920s establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1926 establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1926 establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1930s establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1930s establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1931 establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1931 establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1950s establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1950s establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1957 establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1957 establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1960s establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1960s establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1962 establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1962 establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1963 establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1963 establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1964 establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1964 establishments in Southern Rhodesia
 * Category:1970s establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1970s establishments in Rhodesia
 * Category:1970 establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1970 establishments in Rhodesia
 * Category:1973 establishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1973 establishments in Rhodesia
 * Category:1970s disestablishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1970s disestablishments in Rhodesia
 * Category:1970 disestablishments in Zimbabwe to Category:1970 disestablishments in Rhodesia


 * Nominator's rationale: Country wasn't called Zimbabwe until 1980. This swathe of categories should be renamed to reflect the contemporary name of the country. For simplicity's sake I would put categories for Southern Rhodesia from 1895 to 1964, Rhodesia from 1964 to 1979 and Zimbabwe thereafter (alternatively Southern Rhodesia up to 1979 and Zimbabwe starting from 1980, to make things even simpler). For years before 1895 (where necessary) we should use Zimbabwe in the absence of a contemporary name for the country, or alternatively Matabeleland or Mashonaland as appropriate <b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">—<b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">Cliftonian</b> <b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">(talk)</b></b> 10:39, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose for now. This is quite right in principle, but if we are going to make the change, it should be done consistently for all relevant categories. If the nominator would like to expand this nomination to include them (see instructions at WP:CFD), I would be happy to support it. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:04, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I hope I've done this correctly. As you can see some of the "new" categories already exist, so in these cases it would be a case of merging two categories covering the same things. <b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">—<b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">Cliftonian</b> <b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">(talk)</b></b> 19:04, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Good work! Will support this. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:28, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge all (changing my !vote) per nominator to avoid anachronisms. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:30, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge all -- The nom has precisely and correctly applied the recent precedent on countries that change names. Well done! Peterkingiron (talk) 22:11, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Rename/Merge all per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:24, 26 December 2013 (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.

Category:Wikipedia personalities
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:06, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Wikipedia personalities to Category:Wikipedia people
 * Nominator's rationale: I've nominated all of the for speedy renames to match the head article of Internet celebrity, but this one is less about celebrities but rather just people where significant fame comes from being associated with wikipedia, but to me "celebrity" doesn't quite work, but I'd be happy for a rename to  as well if people prefer. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 19:45, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: see related discussion on the female category here

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Relisted from 2013 December 4 to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:49, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Rename per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:25, 26 December 2013 (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.

Category:Pogrom victims
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


 * The result of the discussion was: Delete.  As has been pointed out, we generally do not keep categories with one entry if they are not a part of a series.  If there are more members at a later date where this is defining, the category can be recreated. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:12, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting pogrom victims


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete. Single-entry category that is both too narrow and too broad. The current occupant is the only verified death in a particular pogrom but the name of the category implies there was only one pogrom. I have added the article to appropriate murder victim categories. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 22:38, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Sadly, there has been more than one victim of a pogrom in history; they just all haven't been added yet to this category. Arguing for the deletiion of this category and moving the victim of blatant anti-Semitic violence resulting in the murder of a Holocaust survivor into Category:Polish murder victims and Category:People murdered in Poland trivializes the specific details of this and thousands more such murders over the course of history. Róża Berger was interned in the Auschwitz concentration camp and survived (!!!), only to be killed in a pogrom in Krakow shortly after being liberated and the war ending. Somehow Category:Polish murder victims and Category:People murdered in Poland just doesn't capture the nuance of Berger's murder in the rather distinct way that Category:Pogrom victims does. Deleting this category would make even less sense than deleting Category:Assassinated United States Presidents, simply because John F. Kennedy is already included Category:People murdered in Texas. Alansohn (talk) 03:25, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete It appears this category has had only one member article, Róża Berger, since some time in 2007. The purpose of categories is not to "capture the nuance" of anything, nor to serve as a tribute to anyone or anything. It is to group some number of related articles in logical ways to make them more accessible and facilitate research on a concept.  This category seems to be a failure in that regard.  Either someone needs to commit to taking the time to research and add articles to this category, or it should be deleted/merged with another category.  I suggest it should be deleted until such time as someone has compiled a list of candidate articles, at which time it can be recreated. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:100;"> Dwpaul   Talk   03:43, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. The "Róża Berger" category was created during an edit war for the meaning of her killing by a communist soldier afraid of an ambush. She died because she refused to show herself from behind a closed door. Some Wikipedians argued (at another article) that it was not a pogrom while others insisted that it was, so the Category:Pogrom victims was created for her as a backdoor method of inserting an POV opinion. <b style="font-family:Papyrus; color:darkblue;">Poeticbent</b> <span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;background:#FF88AF;border:1px solid #DF2929;padding:0.0em 0.2em;">talk 05:35, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep All three reasons of the nominator are flawed. First reason is a known non-reason: there is only one entry now, but there is room for many more. Second reason is too vague: "too narrow and too broad" is not one of the reasons for deletion that are known to me. The third reason is a reason to rename to "Victims of pogroms". But that would imply that they were victims of more than one pogrom, so in short I think the present name is best. Debresser (talk) 11:54, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:OC is a well-established criterion for deletion. If there are legions of pogrom victims who suddenly acquire articles then the subject of the category can be revisited. No idea what you're on about regarding the rest of the nomination. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 12:20, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:OC is indeed a well-established criterion for deletion, but is legitimately used only in cases where it applies. Jerry, if you actually take look at WP:OC, it does include the word "small" but then adds "...with no potential for growth". Unlike categories that "by their very definition, will never have more than a few members" (examples offered there are The Beatles' wives, Husbands of Elizabeth Taylor and Catalan-speaking countries), categories such as this one, which "have realistic potential for growth", are not targeted for deletion. Are you arguing that the number of articles for pogrom victims will never expand or do you have your own idiosyncratic reading of OC#SMALL that is both too narrow and too broad? Alansohn (talk) 15:27, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ignoring your trademark snark, if a category has remained at population one for well over six years, that seems a reasonable argument that it isn't going to expand any time soon. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 17:05, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * This is disservice to the Wikipedia community. I bet, users who run into Category:Pogrom victims wonder why there's just one named individual recognized as such? <b style="font-family:Papyrus; color:darkblue;">Poeticbent</b> <span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold;background:#FF88AF;border:1px solid #DF2929;padding:0.0em 0.2em;">talk 22:36, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Unclear to me whether that's a !vote to Keep or to Delete. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:100;"> Dwpaul  Talk   02:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Keep and populate -- Pogroms were a specific kind of anti-semetic violence in 19th century Russia (then ruling Poland). I do not think it was limited to Poland.  It may be that is is underrepresented in WP bio-articles; if so, it is a deficiency that needs to be corrected, as I cannot believe that all victims were NN.  Since this was something that the state acquiesced in (possibly even encouraged), it is particularly heinous; obviously not on the scale of the holocaust; but it is still worse than a normal murder.  Peterkingiron (talk) 12:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted from 2013 December 5 to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:44, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. Alansohn (talk) 00:45, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep and populate as outlined above. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 19:55, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete The fact that people have had ample time to add more entries and have not suggests there are not more biographies. This is a one entry category, and I see no real claims of who other notable pogrom victims are.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:43, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Are you really suggesting that of the hundreds of thousands (at least) of Jews that were killed in progroms only one was notable? -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 17:24, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with that comment. Not being an expert of this area of history, I do not know the number of people who were killed or who the victims were.  This is essentially about the persecution of Jews in Tsarist Russia.  This was less serious than the holocaust, but was a major driver of Jewish emigration to UK and USA; and thus why there are more Jews in New York than in Israel (or so it is claimed).  Peterkingiron (talk) 13:22, 29 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete/upmerge. Biography articles should mainly be categorized by what the person did that made them notable (e.g. their occupation).  Categorization should not attempt to capture the nuances of how they died. See essay WP:DNWAUC. DexDor (talk) 09:47, 29 December 2013 (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.

Category:Bungeling Empire trilogy
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


 * The result of the discussion was: DELETE, since merging is redundant. -Splash - tk 21:27, 29 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Propose deleting bungeling empire trilogy


 * Nominator's rationale: Results for suggest this is an WP:OR "trilogy" of games that have the same organization as an antagonist. This came to my attention when I closed the AfD for that organization. WP:SMALLCAT probably also applies. BDD (talk) 00:08, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge to parent Category:Brøderbund games. The notion of a trilogy appears to be WP:OR, and the word "trilogy" is not mentioned in any of the 3 articles (Choplifter, Lode Runner, Raid on Bungeling Bay). -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:34, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * They're all in the parent category anyway, or I would've mentioned upmerging. --BDD (talk) 17:37, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete, redundant to merge per above. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:49, 10 January 2014 (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.