Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 February 13



Establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary

 * 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, but redirects from the old names will be useful for future reference and for category navigation. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:23, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Rename Category:1615 establishments in Hungary to Category:1615 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1635 establishments in Hungary to Category:1635 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1646 establishments in Hungary to Category:1646 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1672 establishments in Hungary to Category:1672 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1699 establishments in Hungary to Category:1699 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1700 establishments in Hungary to Category:1700 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1701 establishments in Hungary to Category:1701 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1715 establishments in Hungary to Category:1715 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1717 establishments in Hungary to Category:1717 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1721 establishments in Hungary to Category:1721 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1722 establishments in Hungary to Category:1722 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1724 establishments in Hungary to Category:1724 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1728 establishments in Hungary to Category:1728 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1729 establishments in Hungary to Category:1729 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1766 establishments in Hungary to Category:1766 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1770 establishments in Hungary to Category:1770 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1774 establishments in Hungary to Category:1774 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Rename Category:1780 establishments in Hungary to Category:1780 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary
 * Nominator's rationale This will make it much clearer what the intended scope of the category is. This is especially so since currently the format creates a link in the header to the article on the entity in question. Kingdom of Hungary covers the time involved here and will help people better see what the intended boundaries are. This set seemed to be a large enough to notify people and to establish a clear understanding that this is what we want to do. Anyway once you move into the 19th-century and the Kingdom of Hungary becomes part of first the Austrian Empire, then Austria-Hungary there might be some who just want to upmerge. So the issues could be different, so 1800 seemed a good place to cut off this nomination to make it as straight forward as possible. We did something similar when we moved say Category:1812 establishments in Russia to being Category:1812 establishments in the Russian Empire. The categories need to be clear in their scope to modern editors, while reflecting a scope that conforms to reality on the ground at the time. This is why we have Category:1902 establishments in the Ottoman Empire even though at the time common English usage would have called the area "Turkey". It would just confuse people too much if they found a thing in Albania or Syria in that Turkey category, but the Ottoman Empire category lets people see what is going on. The same works for the use of Kingdom of Hungary.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:11, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. Seems fair and rational. But why then does the list stop at 1780? What about later years, e.g. Category:1837 establishments in Hungary and other years? (cf. WP article Kingdom of Hungary (1526–1867)). Presumably the proposed format should be appropriate for this entire period - and (also presumably) for the period 1867-1918 for the area covered by the Hungarian part of the Dual Monarchy? --Smerus (talk) 20:55, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Support, avoids confusion about the intended scope. The same principle can be applied to Category:1526 in Hungary and so on (but no objection to postpone that to a later nomination). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:26, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * In addition, it should also apply to century (11th to 19th) and decade categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:01, 23 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:26, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * By the way, if my reading of the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867 is correct, the Kingdom of Hungary was re-established in 1867 under the formal title of "Arch-Kingdom of Hungary" or the Lands of the Crown of Saint Stephen. If that's true, then we can rename the remaining establishment years of the 19th century and the early 20th century per above. Though for precision, we may wish to use, say, Category:1880 establishments in the Kingdom of Hungary (1867-1918). Just a thought. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:47, 23 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Support Clearer scope. Dimadick (talk) 01:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Doubtful -- I do not oppose, but consider this completely unnecessary, because there was no Hungary at the time apart from Kingdom of Hungary, though its scope was rather greater than the present country.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:29, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Hungary unambiguously refers to the Kingdom of Hungary in the period considered, and the proposed nominations would break a coherent category structure. Borders and political regimes do change, but we cannot create an entire new chronology tree every time they do. See e.g. Chronology in Switzerland / Helvetic Republic for a precedent. Place Clichy (talk) 09:18, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I would not consider that precedent to be binding in this instance. The Swiss precedent was a case of duplication and brass nameplate changing. The underlying entities were the same. It's not the same for the Kingdom of Hungary and the modern republic which is only a tenth the size of the kingdom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:38, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * (Changing vote) Keep -- for reasons stated above. There is no need to plant a new tree every time a country changes its borders or constitutional status.  I made a neutral vote above (accepting the proposal with doubts).  The fluctuations in the border as the Ottoman Empire grew and then retreated did not mean that there was not continuously a polity called Hungary; and there still is.  In the same way the English Parliament did not cease to exist in 1707; it admitted Scottish members and became the British Parliament, with no substantive change in its operation, except a greater jurisdiction.  The same applies to the Church of England, which was reformed (not created) in the 1530s.  Hungary has had a continuous existence since 895 AD, though its boundaries have periodically grown or shrunk.  Peterkingiron (talk) 12:31, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * What about the province of Lazio? Is it in Italy or Vatican City (as the Papal States are now known)? Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:57, 30 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment This goes well beyond "every time a country changes its borders or constitution" the Kingdom of Hungary was something like 4 times as big as the modern nation, including parts of at least 6 modern countries. The change is very significant, and using the current names and links to articles on the current country is used as reason to perpetuate establishment categories that refer to a place that had no seperate political identify within the Kingdom of Hungary.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:50, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
 * What wrote above is incorrect. The parliament was formally abolished by the act of union; the Scottish members did not simply join the English parliament. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:01, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, William Allen Simpson (talk) 21:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 22:10, 13 February 2021 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 13:15, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Support Rename all — although the current country of a similar name exists, better to distinguish in historical context, as we have with so many others (Russia versus Russian Empire being most prominent lately). I'd have closed Rename, but the most recent !votes have been changing. There has been no activity for weeks, so better to refresh, and put a nail in it.
 * Keep -- Over the centuries, the borders of Hungary have waxed and waned, due to encroachment by the Turks and then reconquest, with fragmentation as part of the WWI peace treaties. At the core of this is a single country, Hungary, subject to different rulers and governmental arrangements at different times.  There is no need to split these.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:46, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Furhtermore merge at least into decade categories per SMALLCAT. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:47, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * duplicate


 * Rename All More clearly places it in historical context. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:01, 15 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the accidental close. I think I reverted everything so it should be as it was before. Nil Einne (talk) 07:16, 17 February 2021 (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:Universities and colleges in Historical Germany

 * 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. There is clear consensus to get rid of the present category. There is also some support for having another category, and Category:Universities and colleges in the German Empire would be similar to others, so this close is no bar to creating that or something like it. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:18, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Universities and colleges in Historical Germany to Category:Defunct universities and colleges in Germany
 * Nominator's rationale: Duplicate, per WP:OVERLAPCAT. : courtesy pinging contributors involved in a previous merge attempt. Place Clichy (talk) 16:18, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Where was the previous one? Johnbod (talk) 17:46, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * See page history. Place Clichy (talk) 01:06, 21 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose The one is specifically for institutions that were in what used to be Germany but no longer is. This is about the loss of German status to the area, which is a very different issue than just closing.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge per nom. Contrary to Johnpacklambert, the contents appear to include universities located in Nuremburg and Ingolstadt which last I checked were still part of Germany. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:58, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, but "Breslau", with two entries, is now in Poland! And one of them is still going strong. Johnbod (talk) 17:46, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, so if this were universities formerly in Germany, it would include Breslau (and all Austrian universities functioning from 1938-1945) but exclude Ingolstadt, etc. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:22, 21 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose the nom. A rename to something like Category:Historic German-language universities and colleges outside modern Germany and Austria might work, except that I suppose much of the teaching was in Latin. Prague & others would belong in such a category. Johnbod (talk) 17:46, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Historical Germany is very vague. Rather split between Category:Defunct universities and colleges in former eastern territories of Germany and Category:Defunct universities and colleges in Germany, per article title Former eastern territories of Germany. Note that two redirects are inappropriate, they are not defunct but they have been polonized. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete (or any Split or Merge that gets rid of this category) The reason we're having trouble coming up with a clean solution is because there is no article on Historical Germany so this category could mean any number of things: universities that would still be inside Germany but no longer exist, universities that still exist but are no longer within Germany, and universities that no longer exist but would be outside of Germany even if they were still around. Just burn this down and boldly create clearer categories as needed from there. - RevelationDirect (talk) 19:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. No such place as Historical Germany.  Germany did not exist until 1870, or maybe later.  And there arent many countries with such disputed boundaries.  But Stuttgart (historic home of Rathfelders) has always been within them so why is that one included?   Because it's so ambiguous!  Rathfelder (talk) 22:45, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Again the bullshit myth! Why do we have so many hundreds of medieval and Early Modern "German" categories then? You need to get your head round the difference between political states and geographical regions. Johnbod (talk) 16:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with using modern states to define geographical areas, but I cant see it as very helpful to look back to where the boundaries used to be when we are categorising institutions which exist now. Especially when the boundaries moved so much. Rathfelder (talk) 21:38, 21 January 2021 (UTC)


 * comment A lot of these articles refer to places that were indisputable part of Germany between 1918-1939, and are indisputable not part of Germany today.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:41, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * That is exactly the reason I proposed a split. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:35, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * That's not precisely correct: out of the 12 articles in the category (not counting redirects), 10 are in present-day Germany. About the others, such as the University of Königsberg (1544-1945), the fact that it was in Germany (in this case, Prussia) for its entire existence is more defining than the loss of German status of the area, whatever that means, or the present country where this city is (Russia). This notion of historical Germany is not a very efficient or defining way to describe these institutions, and has not proven useful. The very notion of lost territories of Germany is also irredentist (and therefore nationalist) and subjective. Why not consider areas like the Low Countries, Bohemia, most of Switzerland which were also part of Germany for centuries? Are the universities of Amsterdam, Leuven, Basel or Prague historically German? It is more defining to categorize these institutions by the actual country in which they were, e.g. Category:Universities and colleges in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. Place Clichy (talk) 01:06, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * That is factually incorrect, Königsberg was not part of the Holy Roman Empire when the university was established and long after, Prussia was nominally a fief of Poland at the time. It was part of the (second) German Empire though. This confirms that the concept of Historical Germany is not workable. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:09, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * This is correct, that's why both the article and the eponymous category are in . We seem to agree that the concept of Historical Germany is not workable. Amsterdam, Basel, Vienna or Prague (the German capital at the time of Charles IV) probably just as well belong to historical Germany, and using this term as a periphrasis for territories lost by Germany after 1945 carries a certain POV. Place Clichy (talk) 16:47, 21 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Suggest -- Category:Defunct universities formerly in Germany. I am assuming that none have continuity with any current institution.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * That is a small variation of Category:Defunct universities and colleges in former eastern territories of Germany which I suggested before. I would be okay with either name. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:20, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 00:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete — burn it down, and never do it again. Defunct places should be listed by the time they became "disestablished", and never by country. Places that exist now should be listed in the places where they are now, not the places where they were previously.
 * This is totally not true, Institutions within the German Empire were clearly influenced by this fact, and just because they outlasted its fall and dismemberment does not mean this placement has no relevance.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Then they should be called Category:Universities and colleges in the German Empire, similar to other defunct former countries such as or . I do not see why universities in Prague, Basel, Leuven or Vienna would not be influenced in the same way by their centuries in a German state. Moreover, the University of Strasbourg, which is extent, and was for centuries located in the Holy Roman Empire and later in the German Empire cannot be defined as a historically German university. Locals would even find that pretty insulting. I therefore wonder why the scope of these categories seems to focus on Eastern territories, especially Breslau/Wroclaw and the former Königsberg. The scope is this category seems to be showing a POV, just as the unexplained notion of Historical Germany. Place Clichy (talk) 01:35, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge "Historical Germany" is too much of a minefield.  Rathfelder (talk) 23:19, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * split between Category:Defunct universities and colleges in former eastern territories of Germany and Category:Defunct universities and colleges in Germany per Marco above. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:06, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, William Allen Simpson (talk) 21:55, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Support Category:Universities and colleges in the German Empire. a headnote could explain that it related to those not in modern Germany with a see also item for that.  I cannot support Laurel Lodged's desire to fragment everything into minute pieces.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:53, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I am confused now. Earlier on you suggested Category:Defunct universities formerly in Germany, that is roughly the same as Category:Defunct universities and colleges in former eastern territories of Germany. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:45, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. As long as they are extant, I see no real utility to categorizing universities by former countries/empires. Categorization by current country is sufficient. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:12, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * My preference is Merge per nom. The German universities of Breslau and Königsberg became defunct in 1945 before being replaced by Polish and Russian institutions. TSventon (talk) 23:43, 22 February 2021 (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:FT-Class articles

 * 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. I did as discussed. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:12, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting ft-class articles


 * Nominator's rationale: Proposing deletion. This cat seems to have been created to support Category:FT-Class London Transport articles but is utterly pointless since no other Wikiprojects have "FT-Class artices". Aza24 (talk) 10:34, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Note: this would require a switch in Category class. I have raised this at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_topics. – Fayenatic  L ondon 10:53, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * are you proposing to delete Category:FT-Class articles but not Category:FT-Class London Transport articles? In that case I don't have a strong opinion, but if you want to delete both I really think it should be advertised at WT:LT. --Trialpears (talk) 19:31, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , excuse my ignorance, what do you mean by that exactly? (I don't see an "FT" in that category class so I'm confused). indeed I'm just referring to the Category:FT-Class articles, my thoughts are that it's rather pointless to have when only one project has such a class; as opposed to Category:FA-Class articles or Category:FL-Class articles, which contain hundreds of articles/lists. Aza24 (talk) 04:51, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, William Allen Simpson (talk) 21:26, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Brill Tramway and Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Underground Electric Railways Company of London have class=FT and therefore populate Category:FT-Class London Transport articles. The latter uses Category class with parameters class=FT and custom1=FT, and I was thinking that it would be necessary to edit that template to override the default parent. However, it looks as if we could simply change the class parameter on that category page to e.g. class=FA. – Fayenatic  L ondon 12:37, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * There is also Category:FT-Class chemical element topics. Those two are the only remaining categories beginning with FT-Class. – Fayenatic  L ondon 12:49, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * As suggested, changed the class parameter on the London Transport to class=FA. However, the FT-Class chemical element topics were not on the Talk page as usual, instead they were on the Project page and did not use a template. Therefore, I've changed them to populate Category:Chemical elements articles by quality instead, as their Talk pages already populate an appropriate class.
 * Delete ft-class articles


 * Delete ft-class chemical element topics (empty)


 * Delete ft-class london transport articles (empty)


 * William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:07, 22 February 2021 (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:Destroyed individual trees

 * 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. – Fayenatic  L ondon 23:51, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Destroyed individual trees to Category:Individual tree deaths by decade
 * Nominator's rationale: The two categories seem to be duplicate in scope. The target category is more populated (including those in subcategories). JsfasdF252 (talk) 20:24, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:41, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment, the point of the category is that these trees were destroyed rather than dying of natural causes. It originates from Category:Destroyed landmarks. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:30, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * As Category:Destroyed landmarks clearly states: "destroyed intentionally or by natural means." Tree deaths would seem to fit, and there's no need to distinguish. OTOH, a lot of these landmark categories are going away.
 * be careful with the latter, an earlier mass nomination failed because of the existance of locally "assigned" landmarks, occurring mostly in the US and Australia. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:49, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:29, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - the target is a container category. Lindsey Creek tree was a tree which met a natural end (not destroyed) and so the 2 categories are by no means duplicates; I would expect the trees in Category:Destroyed individual trees can also already be found within Category:Individual tree deaths by decade. Oculi (talk) 14:19, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Manually Merge as nominated. Sadly, not all the destroyed trees are present in the tree deaths, so simple deletion is not possible. The distinction is too nebulous, and editors seem to be confused. We don't have a matching category called Category:Constructed individual trees that would match our construction/destruction of buildings and structures.
 * Comment Trees are living organisms, they can not be constructed. Dimadick (talk) 06:55, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * High school English: "Poems are made by fools like me, / But only God can make a tree." - Joyce Kilmer. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:58, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep  I agree with Oculi that the categories have a different scope. Dimadick (talk) 06:56, 24 February 2021 (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:Plantain-eaters

 * 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; also overwrite history. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:50, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Plantain-eaters to Category:Crinifer
 * Nominator's rationale: This seems to be a duplicate of the newly-created Category:Crinifer. Also see Articles for deletion/Plantain-eater. Mike Peel (talk) 19:25, 13 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge and overwrite page history. – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:00, 14 February 2021 (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:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic by city

 * 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/merge. As mentioned, it can be difficult to assess categories like this mid-pandemic. Opinions may well change as we go forward, so we shouldn't be too harsh with restricting non-immediate re-creation of these categories, but they certainly should be discussed if re-created. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:04, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting deaths from the covid-19 pandemic by city


 * Propose deleting Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil by city


 * Propose merging Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Rio de Janeiro (city) to Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Rio de Janeiro (state)


 * Propose merging Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in São Paulo to Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in São Paulo (state)


 * Propose merging Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in London to Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in England


 * Propose merging Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Milan to Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Lombardy


 * Propose merging Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Moscow to Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Russia


 * Propose deleting Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Pakistan by city


 * Propose merging Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Karachi to Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Sindh


 * Propose merging Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Paris to Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in France


 * Propose deleting Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain by city


 * Propose merging Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Madrid to Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain


 * Propose merging Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Tokyo to Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan


 * Propose merging Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Wuhan to Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in China


 * Nominator's rationale: As per the consensus established at Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 25, we do not need to categorize deaths from the current pandemic by city. Lettlerhello • contribs 19:19, 13 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge per precedent and per WP:OCLOCATION. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:40, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge and comment If we're upmerging the Madrid category to the Spain one, then the Milan category should be upmerged to the top-level Italy one too. There's no need for all these Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy by region sub-cats with a handful of articles in each.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 08:43, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose -- This is a destructive nom. If a category has at least 5 members it should be allowed to exist.  Removing Wuhan is particularly obnoxious since that is where the pandemic started. However Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain by city is an unnecessary layer as the city categroies can go immediately under Spain.  London has 22 articles; (the rest of) England another 47.  Both these are quite large enough to keep (apart).  It is fine to upmerge small categories, but we should keep anything larger.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:02, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Usually the local geography cats bump up against smallcat but there can also be situations where the locality isn't meaningful, say demolished buildings by riding/congressional district/constituency. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:09, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:21, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment/Future Noms It's hard for me to assess the need for these breakdowns mid-pandemic. Any outcome here should be subject to new noms sooner than most decisions at CFD since the subject matter is in flux. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:09, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment most of these seem to have sufficient content to retain under normal breakdowns (see, e.g., Category:Artists by city or town). I have often heard that 5 articles is the norm for retention, although I haven't seen that in policy. WP:SMALLCAT even permits 1 page categories. I'd like to know why this differs. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:51, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge This is splitting things too much. This leads to more categories than is useful, and hinders navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:37, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge and Delete as nominated. Contents have proven to be frequently incorrect. Many cities/counties have counts that are really from elsewhere, as they have superior hospital facilities. And we know that certain kinds were deliberately miscounted to avoid legal liability.


 * 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:Africa women's national association football teams

 * 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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:48, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting africa women's national association football teams


 * Nominator's rationale: Not used category. Sangjinhwa (talk) 17:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete, overlaps with Category:African women's national association football teams. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Category has been emptied. Liz Read! Talk! 19:25, 14 February 2021 (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:Cardinals 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: delete/merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:48, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting cardinals by country


 * Nominator's rationale: Misguided attempt to duplicate Category:Cardinals by nationality.  Only content apart from the two subcategories below is  Category:Lists of cardinals by country, which clearly dont belong according to the blurb, which says, for example:  "This is a list of cardinals of the Catholic Church from England. It does not include cardinals of non-English national origin appointed to English ecclesiastical offices such as the cardinal protectors of England." and  "This list includes all ethnic Poles, living and deceased, who were raised to the rank of cardinal".   Rathfelder (talk) 16:09, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Cardinals in Australia to Category:Australian cardinals
 * Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary. They are all Australian. Rathfelder (talk) 16:07, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Cardinals in Ireland to Category:Irish cardinals
 * Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary. They are all Irish nationals. Rathfelder (talk) 16:05, 13 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Support, one is not cardinal of (a part of) a country, it is a personal title. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose It is necessary. While it true to say that all Irish cardinals are Irish nationals, it is not true that all Irish cardinals were cardinals in Ireland. Ireland has a long history of giving prelates to the world. These people usually spent their entire episcopate, and their cardinalate, in their adoptive country. See, for example, John Murphy Farley. To I would point out that the current category is not Category:Cardinals of Ireland, it is Category:Cardinals in Ireland. If a cardinal is normally resident in Ireland then he is a "Cardinal in Ireland". This is especially true as most cardinals are also bishops with a specific geographic remit. Irish nationals, on the other hand, can go wherever the Spirit moves them to go. The same is true in the Australian case where Edward Cassidy is an Australian national yet has spent his cardinalate in the Holy See. The scope of Category:Cardinals by country couldn't be clearer: "Cardinals of the Catholic Church who serve or have served in that office in a particular country, regardless of nationality. See Category:Cardinals by nationality for individuals by nationality who were created cardinals, regardless of where they served.". Laurel Lodged (talk) 17:32, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It is completely untrue that "most cardinals are also bishops with a specific geographic remit." There are probably more cardinals who served as diplomats, officers of the Papal See etc than those who served in particular areas.  The diplomats often served in many countries.    This has varied over time.  Categorisation of clergy needs to take a long view. Rathfelder (talk) 11:32, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, if they are cardinal as well as bishop of a diocese (which happens a lot too) they are already in a country category as a bishop. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:55, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment -- If this is about nationality, there is no difference since the people of Northern Ireland are entitled to Irish and British nationality. However, the Catholic Church is quite capable of appointing an Englishman or an American to an Irish archbishopric, though I suspect that does not happen much these days.  I suspect that in theory the Cardinals are the chapter of St Peters Basilica in Rome, but Cardinals ministering in Ireland might be an appropriate way of defining the scope of Category:Cardinals in Ireland.  There has indeed been a long tradition of Ireland exporting clergy to serve elsewhere.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:11, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It would make more sense to have categories of expatriate cardinals, as we do with footballers, than for cardinals in their native land. Rathfelder (talk) 00:11, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Support deletion cardinals are personal titles and are not cardinals of or in any particular place. Some places may have numerous cardinals, others none. Cardinals are called to the Vatican for long stretches, but I wouldn't want to label those as "expatriate cardinals" as some probably attend to matters "back home". Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:56, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Query If this category is deleted, what is to happen to John Murphy Farley? He is currently categorised as an Irish cardinal and an American cardinal. Both can't be true. Do we need a new Category:Cardinals of Irish descent ? Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:49, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * since Farley emigrated to the US at age 22, and did not even the priesthood until he was over 25, the answer to that question has no relevance to this discussion. However I can cite hundreds of cases where we categorize people by situations that only applied to them post-emigration. It would take a major revision of how immigrants are categorized to remove all of these. The entire contents of Cuban Latter Day Saints are people who converted to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints after emigrating to the United States, so I could see elimanating it. The answer to the question on Farley is not affected by this discussion one way or the other.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:29, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree that it does not matter for this category discussion. Anyway, if hypothetically he might have been cardinal in Ireland, then in the United States, it would have been perfectly valid to put him in both categories. With his actual history, having him in the American subcategory should be sufficient. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:34, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Support the distinction between country served in/country of nationality makes sense for bishops and archbishops, who have a specific area severed in. It does not make sense for Cardinals, who hold office connected to the Church as a whole, not to a specific area. Unless we are ready to create Cardinals in Italy and include all non-Italians who held various appointments with the central organization of the Catholic Church. We do not want to go that route.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:40, 19 February 2021 (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:Grand Crosses of the Order of Carol I

 * 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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:45, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting grand crosses of the order of carol i


 * Nominator's rationale: The parent category was deleted two weeks ago after a CfD, but somehow this one was not included. Same applies though - it's a courtesy award for various foreign royals etc when they visited Romania. Le Deluge (talk) 15:20, 13 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per precedent and per WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:30, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:OCAWARD and WP:PERFCAT. ( Thanks for noticing I missed including a subcat with the original nomination.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:10, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete over cat by award.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:29, 19 February 2021 (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:Labels distributed by Universal Records

 * 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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:04, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting labels distributed by universal records


 * Nominator's rationale: Single-entry WP:SMALLCAT for a non-defining characteristic. Distribution, in the music business, is simply a matter of what company's infrastructure is used behind the scenes to deliver the music from the label's offices into the retail stores or online platforms where it's sold -- so record labels aren't particularly defined by who their distributors happen to be, because it has no discernible effect on how the music is actually purchased or consumed by the listener. And while there are a few other parallel categories for distribution conglomerates, they're all much more populated than this -- and they're also of questionable necessity, as there's certainly no comprehensive scheme of always categorizing record labels for the matter of who they happen to have distribution contracts with. If the label isn't an outright subsidiary of Universal, then it doesn't need Universal-related categorization at all. Bearcat (talk) 14:13, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:25, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete as nominated.


 * 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:Manaus Futebol Clube managers

 * 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: do not rename. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:44, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Manaus Futebol Clube managers to Category:Manaus Football Club Managers
 * Nominator's rationale: Right now category name is in Spanish CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose - the category name merely reflects the article name, Manaus Futebol Clube, which is the (Portuguese) style used by the club (eg at the bottom of their homepage). And generally we use the native name of clubs unless they are well known enough to have a WP:COMMONNAME in English - see eg these articles such as Esporte Clube Bahia. If you want to change that, you need to start with a debate to rename the article via Requested_moves and then the category will follow. Also words such as "managers" in these kinds of category names are never capitalised. Le Deluge (talk) 15:33, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose -- current capitalisation is correct. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:12, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose Rightly or wrongly, "Manaus Futebol Clube" is the main article title and the cat should match, per WP:C2D. (Peterkingiron is correct about the capitalization as well.) - RevelationDirect (talk)


 * 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.

People from Chalkidiki
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed" 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: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:42, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Aristotelis to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Propose merging Category:People from Arnaia to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Propose merging Category:People from Kassandra (municipality) to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Propose merging Category:People from Kassandra to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Propose merging Category:People from Nea Propontida to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Propose merging Category:People from Kallikrateia to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Propose merging Category:People from Moudania to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Propose merging Category:People from Polygyros (municipality) to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Propose merging Category:People from Anthemountas to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Propose merging Category:People from Polygyros to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Propose merging Category:People from Sithonia (municipality) to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Propose merging Category:People from Toroni to Category:People from Chalkidiki‎
 * Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to 2nd level administrative division, except cities and larger towns. In this case there aren't any of those exceptions, even the capital Polygyros has only 7,500 people and three articles in Category:People from Polygyros. This is follow-up on this earlier nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 21:35, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 13:31, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge as a good start — Should be targeting at least one million population. Most of these aren't notable for having been anywhere other than Category:Greek people by occupation, but we can prune.
 * A million population is certainly too high. I would suggest a population of 50,000 but the key criterion should be whether we can populate with at least five articles.  If we can it should be kept.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge for Now Very small cats unliekly to aid navigation. No objection to recreating any if they ever get up to 5+ articles though. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:35, 15 February 2021 (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.

People from Chania (regional unit)
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed" 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: merge, except no consensus to merge Category:People from Kissamos. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Apokoronas to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Armenoi to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Asi Gonia to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Fres to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Vamos to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Chania (municipality) to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Eleftherios Venizelos to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Theriso to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Kantanos-Selino to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from East Selino to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Kissamos (municipality) to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Kissamos to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Mythimna to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Platanias (municipality) to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Mousouroi to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Platanias to Category:People from Chania (regional unit)
 * Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to 2nd level administrative division, except cities and larger towns, in this case except Chania (108,000 people). This is follow-up on this earlier nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 13:31, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Kissamos is a quite notable town, and the category currently has 4 members. There are some more articles about people from Kissamos already in the Greek Wikipedia, and this one I will be probably translating soon. Therefore there is a concrete reason to believe the category has potential for growth, and there should probably be kept per WP:SMALLCAT. --Antondimak (talk) 16:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 21:34, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge as a good start — Should be targeting at least one million population. Most of these aren't notable for having been anywhere other than Category:Greek people by occupation, but we can prune.
 * Merge but a million population is certainly too high. I would suggest a population of 50,000 but the key criterion should be whether we can populate with at least five articles. If we can it should be kept. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:18, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge Most for Now/Oppose Apokoronas and Kissamos These small cats hinder navigation, but no objection to recreating any if they get up to 5+ articles. Category:People from Apokoronas is already at 5 (assuming the subcats are alternatively merged) and keep Category:People from Kissamos per Antondimak above. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:43, 15 February 2021 (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.

People from Corinthia
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed" 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: merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:41, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:People from Corinth (municipality) to Category:People from Corinthia
 * Propose merging Category:People from Saronikos, Corinthia to Category:People from Corinthia
 * Propose merging Category:People from Solygeia to Category:People from Corinthia
 * Propose merging Category:People from Tenea to Category:People from Corinthia
 * Propose merging Category:People from Loutraki-Perachora-Agioi Theodoroi to Category:People from Corinthia
 * Propose merging Category:People from Loutraki-Perachora to Category:People from Corinthia
 * Propose merging Category:People from Sikyona (municipality) to Category:People from Corinthia
 * Propose merging Category:People from Feneos to Category:People from Corinthia
 * Propose merging Category:People from Velo-Vocha to Category:People from Corinthia
 * Propose merging Category:People from Velo to Category:People from Corinthia
 * Propose merging Category:People from Xylokastro-Evrostina to Category:People from Corinthia
 * Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to 2nd level administrative division, except cities and larger towns, in this case except Corinth (38,000 people), Sikyona (19,000 people) and Xylokastro (6,000 people). This is follow-up on this earlier nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Support per nom, but noticing some contradictions on size -- Xylokastro is quoted as smaller than Polygyros, which is to be merged in the first-listed of these noms. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 13:32, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Polygyros is indeed larger and is actually the capital of the entire prefecture. However it currently has 3 articles and we have taken the "pessimistic" approach of not assuming growth in these nominations. --Antondimak (talk) 17:15, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 21:34, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge as a good start — Should be targeting at least one million population. Most of these aren't notable for having been anywhere other than Category:Greek people by occupation, but we can prune.
 * Merge but a million population is certainly too high. I would suggest a population of 50,000 but the key criterion should be whether we can populate with at least five articles. If we can it should be kept. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:19, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge All for Now These small categories and extra layers hinder navigation. No objection to recreating any if they ever get to 5+ direct articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:46, 15 February 2021 (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.