Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 May 29



American political candidates by date

 * 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. MER-C 11:11, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:American political candidates by date to Category:American political candidates by year


 * Propose renaming Category:United States presidential candidates by date to Category:United States presidential candidates by year


 * Propose renaming Category:United States vice-presidential candidates by date to Category:United States vice-presidential candidates by year


 * Nominator's rationale: All article titles inside contain years only, not dates. Brandmeistertalk  20:22, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Support -- this clearly refers to election years. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:52, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Support - of course. Neutralitytalk 17:47, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Support - per nom. "Year" is clearly more accurate.--JayJasper (talk) 22:40, 4 June 2015 (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:History of religions school

 * 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 * The result of the discussion was: nomination withdrawn. MER-C 11:12, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose upmerge Category:History of religions school‎ to Category:Christian theological movements
 * Nominator's rationale: upmerge per WP:SMALLCAT, only an eponymous article in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:36, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Populate -- This term refers to a collection of theologians at Gottingen Univoiersity in 1890s. The one article will be appropriate as a main article for a category covering the members, a number of who have articles.  I may need to be renamed Category:History of religions school members‎ Peterkingiron (talk) 18:50, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Of course it can be populated, you're entirely right. Withdraw nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:21, 30 May 2015 (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.

1786 elections

 * 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 Category:United States gubernatorial elections, 1786 to (new) Category:Gubernatorial elections in the United States by year; keep the others. This is a revised close to this CfD. Initially I kept only Category:1786 elections and created 18th-century categories, but on reflection (having tried it) it does not make navigation clearer if we remove the small initial categories from Category:Elections in the United States by year and Category:Elections in the United States by year and state. There are only four year-categories (1777, 1780, 1783 & 1786) with only one member, and after that there are multiple members. Category:Elections in the United States by state and year should remain complete, and keeping Category:New York elections, 1786 saves category clutter on the article (because otherwise the page should be added into multiple parent categories). – Fayenatic  L ondon 07:06, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: I made a follow-up nomination at July 30. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:48, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Propose deleting 1786 elections


 * Propose deleting 1786 elections in north america


 * Propose deleting 1786 elections in the united states


 * Propose deleting 1786 elections in the united states by state


 * Propose deleting new york elections, 1786


 * Propose deleting united states gubernatorial elections, 1786


 * Nominator's rationale: All of these categories either contain each other or the article New York gubernatorial election, 1786. This appears to be the only article on 1786 elections in Wikipedia. Origamiteⓣⓒ 17:32, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep the article at least in one relevant category. For now, the most obvious choice is to merge it into Category:1786 elections and delete the other 5 categories. While Category:1786 elections will contain only one article, there are many other years in the 18th century also with only one election article or very few articles, so it'll require a broader 18th century nomination to improve that structure. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Category:1786 elections, Category:1786 elections in North America and Category:1786 elections in the United States and Category:United States gubernatorial elections, 1786 as legitimate category trees; this article needs to be categorised under something, and the gubernatorial elections on is appropriate (and requires the categories above it). Delete Category:1786 elections in the United States by state and Category:New York elections, 1786 as unnecessary categorisation for a single article. Number   5  7  13:39, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Agree that it's reasonable to keep it in the tree of gubernatorial elections, but don't agree it should be kept in a single-member category. Suggest merging Category:United States gubernatorial elections, 1786 to Category:1786 elections and to Category:New York gubernatorial elections. Also, merely as a suggestion, I would be fine with creating a new Category:18th-century gubernatorial elections in the United States in which this article can also have its place. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:43, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge all but one or two. This is another case of putting up a slender tree (or rather a twig) for the sake of parenting an article.  At the top of this tree is elections by year, which is split into North America and Europe.  I cannot see the merits of a continential split at this period: there were far too few countries that held elections.  I would suggest that the parent should be Category:18th-century elections by country, with US, UK, France, etc subcats.  Until these are better populated, no child categories should be allowed.  We might also keep Category:1786 elections as a worldwide category.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:46, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I like the idea of 18th-centure elections by country, but how many elections were there in 1786? There are currently no articles on them in the encyclopedia. Also, for the sake of completeness, I'd like to point out that I've put up for PRODding List of elections in 1786, a pseudo-disambiguation page which, again, only contains the New York article. Origamiteⓣⓒ 03:34, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If those would be country categories for the whole century they can be decently populated. The Great Britain subcat already exists with some 20 articles. I like the idea but it needs a separate nomination to delete all separate year election categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:46, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Are you talking about separate years for countries, or top level (e.g. Category:1786 elections)? I would strongly object to any attempts to delete the latter, but would be open to the country-by-country cats going. Number   5  7  12:21, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Peterkingiron was talking about creating Category:18th-century elections by country presumably instead of the separate year categories, and I like that idea. So yes it's top level. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:30, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * As stated, I think that's a very bad idea. Number   5  7  20:41, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * My object was to limit the number of slender twigs on a tree. US Presidents and governors are elected every four years; there is an election for the senate and congress every two.  In UK, there were general elections every 7 years at this period; every 5 after 1832, with by-elections for casual vacancies.  I am not sure about other countries as there were few democracies at that period.  My proposal I that we have "18th-century elections by country" and allow categories like "1786 elections" (or possibly instead "1780s elections") as a worldwide category.  Category:18th-century elections in the United States should also be allowed.  At the same time we abolish the continental level.  If the 18th-century US category gets more than a couple of dozen articles, we could consider splitting it.  However the current trend is towards merging thin thread annual category trees into ones covering decades or even centuries.  Many of the colonies had legislatures.  I would suggest one category of all the Continental colonies' legislatures; and another for other British colonies, perhaps covering 17th and 18th centuries together.  With more democratic polities in the 19th century, we will probably need decade categories, rather than centuries.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:15, 5 June 2015 (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:Cossacks in Ukraine

 * 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:History of Cossacks in Ukraine. As mentioned, it might be a good idea to rename Category:Ukrainian Cossacks to Category:Ukrainian Cossack people. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:47, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Cossacks in Ukraine to Category:Ukrainian Cossacks
 * Nominator's rationale: Merge. Recently added redundant category, populated with a couple of articles which just as well fit the old category. I don't see any reason to split hairs. Serves no purpose Eg does one want to have "Don Cossacks in Ukraine" or "Ukrainian Cossacks in America"? I doubt one is going to do such hair splitting of categories, up to "Ukrainian Cossacks in Ukraine". -M.Altenmann >t 14:42, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge -- The problem is that the target (and to some extent the subject) is a mixture of articles on the Cossacks generally and bio-articles on individual people. The latter should perhaps be in Category:Ukrainian Cossack people.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:06, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I guess (while viewing the contents) that this kind of split was exactly what the creator of the nominated category was after. Let's rename this category to Category:History of Cossacks in Ukraine to disambiguate the two categories more clearly. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:49, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Reverse merge to avoid the issues of implying ethnicity in a time and place where it will be contested.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep alongside Category:Cossacks in Russia, or Rename per Marcocapelle. Do not merge; it seems to me that it is worth distinguishing biographies from other historical articles. There seems to be no standard naming pattern for such historical categories (cf. the hierarchy within Category:History by ethnic group), but adding "History of..." would at least make the purpose clearer. Disclosure: I have added several members from the sub-category. – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:39, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:WikiProject Ukraine has been notified of this proposal. – Fayenatic  L ondon 07:06, 28 July 2015 (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 directed by Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy

 * 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. MER-C 11:13, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting films directed by sharmeen obaid-chinoy


 * Nominator's rationale: Do we "really" need this category? I mean the person just got into feature films and the user just created the category with one feature film in the list and one documentry. Umais Bin Sajjad (talk) 13:25, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep That does not seem like a valid reason for deletion. She did not "just get into feature films". She is notable as a filmmaker and has directed several documentary films, some of which are notable for stand-alone articles. She won an Oscar for the documentary Saving Face, and is the only Pakistani till date to get that award. So I believe it meets notability.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 15:10, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep She won Oscar so she is more than notable enough and she is young so she can direct more films in near future.  Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 16:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep She is notable.  sami  talk 17:52, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per the long-established category tree of films by director, and WP:FILMCAT, which states "A category for a director's films should be created even if they have only directed one film (irrespective of whether they are likely to direct more in the future), providing that the director already has an article".  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 17:55, 29 May 2015 (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.

Hidden categories

 * 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. – Fayenatic  L ondon 14:05, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Concerning:
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (to be determined)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (2 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (3 days)


 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (4 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (5 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (6 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (1 or 2 weeks)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (1 week)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (7 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (8 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (9 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (10 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (11 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (12 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (21 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (27 days)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (1 month)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (4 months)
 * Category:Holidays and observances by duration (1 year)


 * Alternative 1 Collectively unhide these categories, without prejudice against future merge or delete proposals for individual categories.
 * Alternative 2 Collectively delete these categories.
 * Alternative 3 A mix of alternative 1 and 2: delete the first category per WP:NONDEF, unhide the others.
 * Nominator's rationale: there is no point in hiding any of these categories. Either they're useful and should be visible or they're not useful and should be deleted. I like alternative 3 the best, but alternative 1 and 2 are okay as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:50, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * See also this discussion: Holidays and observances by duration (1 day).
 * Project Holidays has been notified about this nomination. The creator of these categories is not currently active. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:50, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The value of the "TBD" category would indeed be as a hidden maintenance category, for editors to review and improve articles which are missing the necessary information to be included in one of the "specified length" categories instead. But the "specified length" categories have no particular reason for being hidden as maintenance categories — they should either be unhidden as mainspace categories if consensus deems them useful, or just deleted. My own preference would be to delete them all — to me, the length of any given holiday or observance isn't a substantive point of commonality between otherwise unrelated events, but is essentially just WP:OCAT on a superficially shared characteristic. The two-day category, for instance, contains events as diverse as Hillbilly Days, Gawai Dayak, Independence Day (Turkmenistan) and the Trinidad and Tobago Carnival, which is an absurd set of topics that have nothing in common besides how long they happen to be. And if we delete those, then the "TBD" loses its reason for existing as well — it has value only if we're keeping all of the others. Delete all. Bearcat (talk) 16:18, 31 May 2015 (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.

A few more award categories

 * 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 all. – Fayenatic  L ondon 14:08, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting grand crosses with collar of the order of charles iii


 * Propose deleting grand cordons of the order of the chrysanthemum


 * Propose deleting grand crosses of the order of fidelity


 * Propose deleting grand crosses of the order of merit (austria)


 * Propose deleting grand cordons of the order of leopold (belgium)


 * Propose deleting knights of the order of vitéz


 * Propose deleting grand order of king dmitar zvonimir recipients


 * Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OCAWARD, per WP:NONDEF, per previous discussion and many discussions before. The categories mainly contain heads of state, nobility and politicians to whom the granting of the order is merely a gesture. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete most -- King Dmitar Zvonimir seems to granted by Croatia to its own citizens and is thus evidence of their notability. Charles III is somewhat older and I am less sure about it.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:14, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Regarding King Dmitar: though also given to its own citizens, it's really not a defining characteristic across the articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:55, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete all none of these awards are defining.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete all - nondefining award-cruft. Neutralitytalk 17:48, 1 June 2015 (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:Holidays and observances by scheduling (two dates)‎

 * 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. MER-C 11:18, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting holidays and observances by scheduling (two dates)‎


 * Nominator's rationale: delete because the three articles in the category have nothing in common with each other. One article concerns two dates because of a time zone difference, one article concerns two dates because it is a night celebration, one article is a plain two different dates (4 days in between). Also delete the category per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:28, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * delete per nom. I keep wondering whether Easter should be here, for one thing. Mangoe (talk) 21:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * delete - confusing, nondefining, smallcat. Neutralitytalk 17:49, 1 June 2015 (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:Holidays and observances by scheduling (same week each year)‎

 * 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. MER-C 11:17, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting holidays and observances by scheduling (same week each year)‎


 * Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, only one article. No need to merge, the article is well-classified in Category:Thematic weeks already. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:13, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * delete per nom-- and what's "same week" anyway? Mangoe (talk) 21:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - confusing. Neutralitytalk 17:49, 1 June 2015 (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:Aditi Singh Sharma songs

 * 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 (G5) by Anthony Bradbury. MER-C 11:16, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting aditi singh sharma songs


 * Nominator's rationale: Was not sure how to tag this-but this category is basically the same as Arijit Singh songs from what I can tell. Wgolf (talk) 03:48, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Support deleting but don't agree on the rationale. It concerns a song sung by two different singers. A more appropriate rationale is WP:SMALLCAT, only one article in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:19, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, smallcat. Neutralitytalk 17:48, 1 June 2015 (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:19th-century introductions in Scotland

 * 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: upmerge/delete as below. – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:46, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting 19th-century introductions in scotland


 * Nominator's rationale: There's no other introductions by countries within Category:Debuts or elsewhere. Should be moved to Category:19th-century introductions and possibly into Category:19th-century establishments in Scotland. Ricky81682 (talk) 02:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge to Category:19th-century introductions per nom and per WP:SMALLCAT. No need for the additional merge to Category:19th-century establishments in Scotland, the first article doesn't belong there, the second article is already in that tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:46, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete but add Dundee cake to Category:19th-century introductions. The distillery appears as an 1815 establishment already and no more is needed.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * That's fine with me as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:34, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Upmerge / delete, as above. Neutralitytalk 17:49, 1 June 2015 (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.