Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 March 29



Category:League of Ireland U19 Division

 * 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. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:35, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Propose deleting league of ireland u19 division


 * Nominator's rationale: Basically empty since it only contains the main article. No similar categories exist (i.e. U19 leagues in other countries). Pichpich (talk) 19:51, 29 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - I think the article is categorised well enough for no upmerge to be needed. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:57, 30 March 2019 (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.

Death customs by country

 * 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 all. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:15, 7 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Propose merging Category:Death customs by country to Category:Burials by country
 * Propose merging Category:Death customs in India to Category:Death customs, Category:Death in India and Category:Indian culture
 * Propose merging Category:Death customs in Pakistan to Category:Death customs, Category:Death in Pakistan and Category:Pakistani culture
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, Indian category contains 1 cat + 1 article, Pakistan category contains only the same article. I noticed only two more pages in Category:Death customs that could be added into the India category, which IMHO is insufficient to make it useful. If those two country categories are merged, then the parent will contain only Category:Burial monuments and structures by country and Category:Cemeteries by country, making it an unnecessary layer. – Fayenatic  L ondon 13:15, 29 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment -- There is a problem with the principle of this merger. Hindus are not buried: they are cremated.  The Parsees (and some Buddhists) practice excarnation as a means of disposing of human remains.  If anything reverse merge, but I am not suggesting that burial categories should be renamed; certainly not for countries where that is the norm.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:37, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. While Peterkingiron is right on the principle, it is not a problem in this particular nomination. Death customs in India and Pakistan are not proposed to be merged to a Burials category, so the only things that are proposed to be merged to Category:Burials by country are the two subcategories Category:Burial monuments and structures by country‎ and Category:Cemeteries by country‎, and for these two subcategories the merge is perfectly alright. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:35, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Support most death customs aren't specific to a country (rather than to a religion), but what's mostly here are cemetery categories. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:13, 5 April 2019 (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:Death customs in Latin America

 * 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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 00:21, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting death customs in latin america


 * Nominator's rationale: Contains only, which is in the sibling . – Fayenatic  L ondon 13:11, 29 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - No objection to re-creation if the need arises. Anomalous+0 (talk) 06:18, 31 March 2019 (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.

St. Gallen

 * 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 per option B. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 07:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming:
 * OPTION A: use "town"
 * Category:St. Gallen to Category:St. Gallen (town)


 * Category:Buildings and structures in St. Gallen to Category:Buildings and structures in St. Gallen (town)
 * Category:Christianity in St. Gallen to Category:Christianity in St. Gallen (town)
 * Category:Churches in St. Gallen to Category:Churches in St. Gallen (town)
 * Category:Companies based in St. Gallen to Category:Companies based in St. Gallen (town)
 * Category:Media in St. Gallen to Category:Media in St. Gallen (town)
 * Category:Organisations based in St. Gallen to Category:Organisations based in St. Gallen (town)
 * Category:People from St. Gallen to Category:People from St. Gallen (town)
 * Category:Sport in St. Gallen to Category:Sport in St. Gallen (town)
 * Category:Tourist attractions in St. Gallen to Category:Tourist attractions in St. Gallen (town)


 * OPTION B: use "city"
 * Category:St. Gallen to Category:St. Gallen (city)


 * Category:Buildings and structures in St. Gallen to Category:Buildings and structures in St. Gallen (city)
 * Category:Christianity in St. Gallen to Category:Christianity in St. Gallen (city)
 * Category:Churches in St. Gallen to Category:Churches in St. Gallen (city)
 * Category:Companies based in St. Gallen to Category:Companies based in St. Gallen (city)
 * Category:Media in St. Gallen to Category:Media in St. Gallen (city)
 * Category:Organisations based in St. Gallen to Category:Organisations based in St. Gallen (city)
 * Category:People from St. Gallen to Category:People from St. Gallen (city)
 * Category:Sport in St. Gallen to Category:Sport in St. Gallen (city)
 * Category:Tourist attractions in St. Gallen to Category:Tourist attractions in St. Gallen (city)


 * Nominator's rationale: to remove ambiguity.
 * The Swiss city/town of St. Gallen appear to be the primary topic over the eponymous Canton of St. Gallen. However, the ambiguity should not be replicated in the cateory names, because ambiguous category titles cause miscategorisation which is hard to detect. The undisambiguated title should be converted to Category disambiguation pages.
 * Note that the lede of the head article describes St. Gallen as a town, but it is categorised in Category:Cities in Switzerland. I currently have no preference between the two disambiguators, so long as some  disambiguator is used, so I have listed both options: OPTION A and OPTION B.
 * Examples of similar disambiguation of city categories include:
 * Rio de Janeiro/Category:Rio de Janeiro (city) — CFD 2018 January 15
 * Dublin/Category:Dublin (city) — CFD 2011 January 4
 * Birmingham/Category:Birmingham, West Midlands — CFD 2010 February 26
 * -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)


 * Support rename with a preference for option B. The article St. Gallen uses both "town" and "city" but in German it is clearly a "Stadt" (while a "Markt" would be more comparable to a "town"). Marcocapelle (talk) 14:58, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, @Marcocapelle. That checks out, and it persuades me to support Option B. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:47, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Option B I remain unconvinced by the argument that a category needs disambiguation but an article does not. If "common name" is the key, then it should be key for both entities, not just one alone. Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:44, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per option B. Agree that "Stadt" more clearly corresponds to "city".  Sandstein   09:36, 2 April 2019 (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:People's Republic of China articles missing geocoordinate data

 * 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. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 03:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:People's Republic of China articles missing geocoordinate data to Category:China articles missing geocoordinate data
 * Nominator's rationale: Per China/category:China, as established at Talk:Chinese civilization/Archive 26 which decided that "China" would refer to the People's Republic of China. We already have a separate Category:Taiwan articles missing geocoordinate data. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:17, 29 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk)
 * Merge since the accepted Wikipedia term is China.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2019 (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.

Pharaohs by millenium

 * 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 all. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Propose deleting 4th-millennium bc pharaohs


 * Propose deleting 3rd-millennium bc pharaohs


 * Propose deleting 2nd-millennium bc pharaohs


 * Propose deleting 1st-millennium bc pharaohs

Category:32nd-century BC Pharaohs Category:31st-century BC Pharaohs Category:30th-century BC Pharaohs Category:29th-century BC Pharaohs Category:28th-century BC Pharaohs Category:27th-century BC Pharaohs Category:26th-century BC Pharaohs Category:25th-century BC Pharaohs Category:24th-century BC Pharaohs Category:23rd-century BC Pharaohs Category:22nd-century BC Pharaohs Category:21st-century BC Pharaohs Category:20th-century BC Pharaohs Category:19th-century BC Pharaohs Category:18th-century BC Pharaohs Category:17th-century BC Pharaohs Category:16th-century BC Pharaohs Category:15th-century BC Pharaohs Category:14th-century BC Pharaohs Category:12th-century BC Pharaohs Category:11th-century BC Pharaohs Category:10th-century BC Pharaohs Category:9th-century BC Pharaohs Category:8th-century BC Pharaohs Category:7th-century BC Pharaohs Category:5th-century BC Pharaohs Category:4th-century BC Pharaohs


 * Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT, Category:Pharaohs is already grouped by dynasty which provides relevant timeframe. Also, Category:Rulers by millennium already contains subcats for relevant times. Brandmeistertalk  09:31, 29 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment it is unclear why only the millennium categories have been nominated but not the Century categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Added century categories. Brandmeistertalk  21:05, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose Several of the dynasties are overlapping, and the placement of a number of Pharaohs in specific dynasties is unclear. A chronological list is much clearer. Dimadick (talk) 08:20, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * For such cases we have foo-century BC rulers, like Category:31st-century BC rulers. They could be added separately from dynasties. Brandmeistertalk  09:25, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * So that means you are proposing a merger rather than deletion? Marcocapelle (talk) 09:47, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The foo-century rulers categories already contain the Pharaohs of the relevant dynasty subcats (e.g., Category:31st-century BC rulers has the subcat Category:Pharaohs of the First Dynasty of Egypt). So merging into foo-century rulers would be redundant in my opinion. Brandmeistertalk  12:42, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * That only works well when every dynasty lasts one whole century. Since in general that is not the case, I would instead suggest a merge of the articles to the rulers by century categories and simultaneously removing the Egyptian dynasty subcats from the rulers by century categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:46, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * That would remove them from the Category:Egyptian people by century category tree, without having any benefits for locating specific individuals in regional history. Dimadick (talk) 07:44, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Fair point, so then it should be a dual merge to a rulers/monarchs by century category and an Egyptian people by century category. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:32, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The Pharohs were not aware that they were living in millenia.Rathfelder (talk) 09:29, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Were they aware they were of a certain dynasty number? Neither is very relevant anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:47, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment -- 32nd century is being used for predynastic rulers, all of whom are undated. It should become a redirect to a category for pre-dynastic rulers.  I do not favour millennium categories as there have not been enough centuries for them to need to be split.  However, chronology in Egypt is normally done by dynasty, not by absolute dates.  I would this suggest that the century categories should be containers for the dynasties that ruled in the period.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:05, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * They are not undated, they belong to the Naqada III period, which starts in the 32nd century BC. And every placement of a person in the categories is based on his/her known or estimated dates in the List of pharaohs. Dimadick (talk) 07:40, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * oppose deleting the century categories, especially those from 9th century BC - 1st century BC when the chronology is basically sound and scholarship does operate in absolute dates. Dynasties and centuries are not the same thing. For example, the 23rd dynasty lasted from 837 - 728 BC: so it makes sense for some of its Pharaohs to go in the 9th century category and some in the 8th century category. In the other direction, too, the 4th century contains six different dynasties - the first and last of which extend into the centuries before and after. It is useful to be able to go to a category that has, at a glance, all the 4th century BC Pharaohs, rather than having to go through six dynasty categories. For earlier times, this is less relevant and the 32nd century cat certainly should be deleted - that's spurious accuracy. Furius (talk) 10:15, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Again no. These are people from the Naqada III period which has specific time estimates. Dimadick (talk) 11:21, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * According to our article on Naqada III though, the period runs from c.3200 to ca. 3000. That's not a 'specific time estimate' and radiocarbon dates of objects from this period are +-100 years. Moreover, several of the Pharaohs in this category are referred to as ruling in "late Naqada III" which would be 31st century according to our own article on Naqada III. Finally, most of these articles provide no citation for the date of their subject (nor even mention a date in the main text), so the categorisation is, in effect, being used to introduce an unreferenced fact into the article. Furius (talk) 12:23, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * oppose deleting the century categories per Furius. Would like to see a more developed proposal along the lines indicated by Marco. Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:48, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose. That would remove them from the Category:Egyptian people by century category tree is the problem; either they'd be left out, or you'd have to put them back individually.  What's the point of merging them into the category when you could reduce the size of the category by creating a logical subcategory for pharaohs in that century?  Moreover, note that we don't have a lot of by-century biographies of ancient Egyptians.  Category:17th-century BC Egyptian people, for example, has a pharaohs subcategory with 55 entries and all of 2 other articles.  Separating the pharaohs from the others of their century makes it easier to find the non-pharaohs.  Nyttend backup (talk) 22:59, 1 April 2019 (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:Buildings and structures in Gustavia, Saint Barthélemy

 * 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. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:39, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Propose merging Category:Buildings and structures in Gustavia, Saint Barthélemy to Category:Gustavia, Saint Barthélemy
 * Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, there is just one article about a building in this category. For reference Gustavia, Saint Barthélemy is a village on the island of Saint Barthélemy on which some 10.000 people are living. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:44, 29 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge -- The one article is already in Churches in Saint Barthelemy, which is in turn in Build & Struct in Saint Barthelemy, so no need to dual merge. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:43, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * ALT Shouldn't there be a second target of Category:Buildings and structures in Saint Barthélemy? Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:50, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Not in this particular case: the article is already in Category:Roman Catholic churches in Saint Barthélemy. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:39, 1 April 2019 (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:Religion in Poland by city
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 June 21%23Category:Religion in Poland by city

Category:Christianity in St. Gallen

 * 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. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:18, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Propose deleting christianity in st. gallen


 * Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant container category as it contains only one subcategory. There is no need to merge because the subcategory is already part of Category:Buildings and structures in St. Gallen. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Support. – Fayenatic  L ondon 07:21, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Support Doesn't aid navigation with current or foreseeable content. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose Isn't this necessary for intangibles like Roman Catholic Diocese of Saint Gallen, things like Zu Lob und Dank Gottes, and people like Saint Gall, none of which can really be placed in Category:Churches in St. Gallen? Furius (talk) 16:46, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Saint Gall is already in the subCategory:Abbey of Saint Gall; Roman Catholic Diocese of Saint Gallen is about Christianity in the canton, not specifically in the city. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:41, 1 April 2019 (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:National Heroes

 * 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 14:16, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Propose Deleting Category:National Heroes
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SHAREDNAME
 * This groups awards together based on whether the name of the award has "National Heroes" in the title when translated into English. National Heroines and Heroes of Nicaragua, Category:Ancient Greek heroes, and National Heroes of Sri Lanka all have different inclusion criteria, different cultural contexts and different native languages. The proper place for similar names is in this disambiguation page. (There are several communist era awards related to Hero of the Soviet Union so no objection if someone wants to work on a more narrow main article and category.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:07, 29 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Background We deleted a similar category for awards with "Gold Medal" in the title here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:07, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Question "National Hero" sounds like a country's greatest award for something or another, like the Victoria Cross or the (US) Medal of Honor. What if we renamed it and converted it into the top-level category of a tree for highest-national-award recipients?  I can't say whether it would be true in all countries (e.g. would the Pour le Mérite count for Prussians?), but in some countries, this alone is enough for notability; look at the Medal of Honor recipients who had normal, non-notable lives except for the actions that warranted the medal and the significant coverage resulting from that honor.  Nyttend backup (talk) 23:02, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * A Hero of the Soviet Union was the top award for the USSR and was absolutely defining so a lof of Eastern Bloc countries during the Cold War as well as former Soviet countries in the present immitated that by creating similarly named awards. (How defining those namesake award are varies a lot.) My guess is that was the intent of this category was to group those together which is potentially reasonable and the category just got filled with similarly sounding junk since there was no main article to define the inclusion criteria. As far as your broader suggestion, I'm open to creating a top award per country award but I think we would need separate ones for military/civilian.  RevelationDirect (talk) 01:01, 3 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. This title will inevitably be WP:SHAREDNAME or WP:SUBJECTIVECAT, or a hybrid thereof. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:56, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep and purge This category currently mixes the various awards modelled after the Hero of the Soviet Union award, mostly in former Eastern block states, with any folk hero such as or . The first set is clearly linked and forms a defining group, unlike some examples given of awards purely called Merit or Gold which only share a name. Also note for instance how commons makes the difference between commons:Category:Title of National Hero by country for the soviet-style orders and commons:Category:National heroes by country for other "folk" heroes, without a capital H. Place Clichy (talk) 09:56, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * If kept and purged, rename to Category:National Heroes (Eastern Bloc) for disambiguation. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:58, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * some countries such as Belize, Jamaica or Indonesia etc. cannot be considered to be part of the Eastern bloc. However they have an official award that seems to be inspired somehow by the Soviet award, or maybe the Cuban award for the many Caribbean countries seen at National Hero (disambiguation) (a redirect to People's Hero). Therefore, I suggest instead Category:National Heroes (award) with a hatnote such as This category is for the titles, awards or orders of National or People's Hero officially awarded by a state, such as Hero of the Soviet Union, and the recipients of these awards. For otherwise unofficial folk heroes, see Category:Heroes. Place Clichy (talk) 15:05, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok if kept and purged that is probably the best solution. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:53, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * No objection to Category:National Heroes (Eastern Bloc) since that was likely the intention of the category and avoids a shared name issue. I also noticed the grouping in the Caribbean with former British colonies or current overseas territories but I suspect there is a non-Soviet source since I don't see the politics of the Cayman Islands ever immitating the USSR. RevelationDirect (talk) 11:52, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * BTW I came accross nl:Heldenorde and nl:Categorie:Heldenorde, in what is I believe your native language. This may help to define the scope. Place Clichy (talk) 17:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It is my native language but the article is not sourced. As far as the category is concerned, I am not convinced of keeping, it is a borderline sharedname issue, even more after it appears not to be an exclusive Eastern Bloc thing. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:35, 16 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete the awards have too different of criteria to be seen as a unified whole.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:57, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: if there's a great need for something like Category:National Heroes (Eastern Bloc), it can be created another time. Bondegezou (talk) 13:30, 6 May 2019 (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:Danish Sports Hall of Fame inductees

 * 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 both. For editors interested in creating a list, the current articles in the inductees category are listed at Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 March 29. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 00:20, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Propose Deleting Category:Halls of fame in Denmark
 * Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Danish Sports Hall of Fame inductees
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCAWARD (WP:DEFINING) and, for the parent category, WP:C1
 * Wikipedia doesn't have a main article for the Danish Sports Hall of Fame. The awkward Google translation of their web site describes itself as a "gallery" but I'm not sure if that means a physical museum or a web gallery. I clicked through many of the articles and didn't see any that even mention the award. This award doesn't seem defining but it could work as a list. Normally I listify the winners in the main article but, since there isn't one, I put them here on the creator's talk page so no work is lost. (There are no other contents in the parent category but no objection to recreating Category:Halls of fame in Denmark if that list article or other content is created.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:03, 29 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Listify -- I strongly suspect this is an on-line only gallery. Certainly I see no sign of a physical gallery on the website.  In any event this fails OCAWARD.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:54, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * @Peterkingiron, the question of whether or not there is a physical gallery is irrelevant. The test is whether membership of the HoF is a WP:DEFINING characteristic of the inductees. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:22, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not WP:DEFINING. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:24, 1 April 2019 (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.