Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 19



Category:Proto-vegans

 * 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)  Qwerfjkl  talk  17:56, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting proto-vegans
 * Nominator's rationale: I created this category years ago in 2019 before I fully understood the rules on categories. The "proto-vegan" is not WP:DEFINING for such individuals. I believe it is best for the category to be removed. We already have a well-sourced category for veganism activists. Psychologist Guy (talk) 22:07, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 05:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete — with the understanding that the content has already been merged to the appropriate veganism activists equivalent.
 * Speedy Despite the passage of time, this looks like WP:C2E to me, author request with limited later contributions from others. - 11:59, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete GenuineArt (talk) 10:15, 22 February 2023 (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:Quaker meeting houses

 * 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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  17:57, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Quaker meeting houses to Category:Friends meeting houses
 * Nominator's rationale: rename per Friends meeting house. A RM on the article name just ended in no consensus. Before that, a speedy rename of the category was opposed. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:16, 11 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Category:Quaker meeting houses to Category:Friends meeting house – C2D. User:Namiba 13:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose speedy. Namiba The overall category is Category:Quakerism and then Category:Quaker meetings, which are consistent with the current name. Also there are numerous subcategories that should also be changed if this one is. TSventon (talk) 23:50, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I am proposing a reverse rename for the article. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:12, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * On hold pending discussion at Talk:Friends meeting house. – Fayenatic  L ondon 17:35, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Moved to Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_February_11 after RM ended without consensus. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:22, 11 February 2023 (UTC)


 * pinging contributors to speedy discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:22, 11 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose - a parent is Category:Quaker meetings and WP:C2C trumps C2D. Clarity in category names is good. Oculi (talk) 19:44, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I think in most cases C2D trumps C2C. As WAS says below, the more specific the better. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:05, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * That's not so. Article names follow no prescribed pattern whereas WP:C2C prefers a pattern in category names. 'Friends Meeting house' is ambiguous with no other context. WP:C2D anyway refers to eponymous topic categories and this is a set category. The topic category here is Category:Quakerism and every single subcat and sub-subcat contains 'Quaker' in its title. Oculi (talk) 22:26, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The problem with the parent category is the main article, "Monthly meeting", can't possibly be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for that phrase. But that problem is initially for an WP:RM, not CFD. - RevelationDirect (talk) 11:55, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:34, 12 February 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  20:53, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support with redirect — match main article. There are many such categories where one or more parents are a common name, while sub-categories are more specific. Mormanism versus LDS. Protestantism. Catholicism.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:12, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support with a Redirect to match the main article and, while I did not participate in that RM discussion, in them I usually favor naming groups by how they self-identify. Leaving a category redirect would prevent any confusion among editors using WP:HOTCAT. - RevelationDirect (talk) 11:55, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Agree, added redirect to my !vote.


 * 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:Television episodes about the Crusades
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Television episodes about the Crusades

Category:Manuscripts written in undeciphered writing systems

 * 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: no consensus. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  17:59, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Manuscripts written in undeciphered writing systems to Category:Undeciphered manuscripts
 * Nominator's rationale: Until recently this has been a 4 item category. Some issues have arisen following a discussion on FTN and later the Voynich Manuscript talk page that for at least two members of the category (Voynich and Rohonc) we can't actually state that they are writing systems. They may be old hoaxes from the middle ages, or ciphers, and shouldn't really take a position on it. Renaming the category to avoid the statement on whether or not its in a writing system would resolve those concerns while still keeping the category useful for navigation in that it would contain manuscripts readers expect within it. --(loopback) ping/whereis 07:49, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 05:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:08, 10 February 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  15:17, 11 February 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  20:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. If a manuscript contains or potentially contains an undeciphered writing system, the sole fact that it has such unique/rare content is more or equally defining as the mere fact that it's undeciphered, which may be for more mundane reasons, as you said. So this defining characteric should not be dilluted in the category name. —Alalch E. 23:49, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment -- The Khitan subcat is useless as the one MS is already in this category. However I wonder if we need to merge this and the inscriptions sibling into a single Category:Texts in undeciphered writing.  I know of at least one more item which might have appeared, which is a draft agreement written in 17th century shorthand, whose content I know only from it being labelled in longhand.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * That would also be a perfectly acceptable outcome --(loopback) ping/whereis 14:51, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Seems like a good idea. —Alalch E. 20:24, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Rename to Category:Manuscripts with undeciphered writing — under Category:Manuscripts, some 3 layers down (under Category:Documents‎ under Category:Texts). For whatever reason, Category:Inscriptions is not under Category:Texts. But both inscriptions and texts are under Category:Writing.
 * I have moved Category:Inscriptions under Category:Texts. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:56, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Not sure that's a good idea. But then Category:Inscriptions with undeciphered writing can exist, too.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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:Icelandic blind people
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Icelandic blind people

Category:Icelandic sexologists
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Icelandic sexologists

Category:Bronze sculptures in Calabria

 * 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)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:00, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Bronze sculptures in Calabria to Category:Bronze sculptures in Italy
 * Propose merging Category:Bronze sculptures in Emilia-Romagna to Category:Bronze sculptures in Italy
 * Propose merging Category:Bronze sculptures in Lazio to Category:Bronze sculptures in Italy
 * Propose merging Category:Bronze sculptures in Lombardy to Category:Bronze sculptures in Italy
 * Propose merging Category:Bronze sculptures in Piedmont to Category:Bronze sculptures in Italy
 * Propose merging Category:Bronze sculptures in Sicily to Category:Bronze sculptures in Italy
 * Propose merging Category:Bronze sculptures in Tuscany to Category:Bronze sculptures in Italy
 * Propose merging Category:Bronze sculptures in Umbria to Category:Bronze sculptures in Italy
 * Propose merging Category:Bronze sculptures in Veneto to Category:Bronze sculptures in Italy
 * Nominator's rationale: Cluster of newly created WP:SMALLCATs. Again, it does not aid user navigation to obsessively subcategorize everything down to highly granularized subcategories of just a small handful of articles each -- these would be fine if there were five or six articles per category, but are not needed for just one, two or three. The city-level categories for Rome and Florence are large enough to be kept, so should just be moved to the target category along with the articles, but the region-level categories aren't needed for anything below five or six articles per region. Bearcat (talk) 19:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support - entirely agree with the nom. Also, large numbers of English-speaking readers are at best vague about Lazio, Emilia-Romagna etc. Personally I'd re-upmerge even "if there were five or six articles per category" - only at about 80 would the Italian category get too big, imo. But Rome & Florence are ok. Johnbod (talk) 04:47, 20 February 2023 (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:Regulation in Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Regulation in Iceland

Category:Parishes in Denmark by diocese

 * 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)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:01, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting parishes in denmark by diocese
 * Propose merging parishes in the diocese of aalborg to
 * Propose merging parishes in the diocese of aarhus to
 * Propose merging parishes in the diocese of copenhagen to
 * Propose merging parishes in the diocese of funen to
 * Propose merging parishes in the diocese of haderslev to
 * Propose merging parishes in the diocese of helsingør to
 * Propose merging parishes in the diocese of lolland–falster to
 * Propose merging parishes in the diocese of ribe to
 * Propose merging parishes in the diocese of roskilde to
 * Propose merging parishes in the diocese of viborg to
 * Nominator's rationale: Cluster of newly created one-entry or two-entry WP:SMALLCATs, crosscategorizing the same set of Danish parishes as the below batch on a different criterion -- but it still isn't aiding navigation to obsessively subcategorize everything down into granularized categories of just one or two articles each. To be fair, one category here (Aarhus) actually does hit five articles, and could potentially be kept on that basis -- but I've still included it here for discussion anyway, because there's also a potential argument that Aarhus still doesn't need its own subcategory if it's the only one of the set that can be justified. And even if it is kept, the "Parishes by diocese" wouldn't be needed as an intermediate step between it and the parent category, which could just directly contain the Aarhus subcategory itself without needing to make editors two-step their way through a superfluous level of categorization to get to it. So Aarhus is legitimate on size grounds but still only of debatable necessity, and can just be directly moved to the target category if it's kept -- but none of the other nine have enough articles to be justified at all, and the "by diocese" layer isn't needed. Bearcat (talk) 18:39, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose: I am currently working on translating hundreds of articles from the Danish Wikipedia about the parishes, and these categories will be needed or else there will be hundreds of articles crammed into Category:Parishes of Denmark. greyzxq  talk 18:46, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * When we do have hundreds of articles to be subcategorized like this, then you're free to create the needed categories. But no, you do not get to create hundreds of empty or underpopulated categories first and then populate them later — you create the articles first and then the subcategories may follow only once they can be populated with five or six or ten or twenty articles right off the bat. It's "the articles come first and the categories wait until the content already exists to be filed in them", not "the categories come first and the articles to populate them with happen later". That is, you get these hundreds of articles in place first, and then you can sweep back through them to recategorize them by diocese or municipality after the articles are all already in place. Bearcat (talk) 19:20, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand deleting the municipality ones because they'll likely stay with only a couple articles in for some time, but i still strongly oppose deleting the diocese ones as they have a larger scope and will be filled up in no time. I understand everything you're saying, and I should've realised that before I made them all, but all deleting them will do is make another job for me to do later that's already been done. greyzxq  talk 19:35, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:33, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge, merge per nom: categories follow articles, not the other way around. On top of that: this seems to be unrelated to dioceses, the header of Category:Parishes of Denmark says: This category is for civil or geographic parishes in Denmark. and the articles provide secular data e.g. about number of people living there. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:18, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge — these should not be in a secular parish category. Do not recreate.
 * Merge both WP:SMALLCAT and WP:SHAREDNAME are at issue here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:02, 20 February 2023 (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:Parishes in Denmark by municipality

 * 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. Reparent instead any with more than 5 articles. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:49, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting parishes in denmark by municipality
 * Propose merging parishes in aabenraa municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in aalborg municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in aarhus municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in ærø municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in bornholm municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in halsnæs municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in herning municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in horsens municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in langeland municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in lolland municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in norddjurs municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in slagelse municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in syddjurs municipality to and
 * Propose merging parishes in tønder municipality to and
 * Nominator's rationale: Cluster of newly created one-entry or two-entry WP:SMALLCATs. As always, everything does not always need to be subcategorized all the way down to the most granular level possible right off the bat -- these would be fine if there were five or six articles to file in each category, but it does not aid navigation at all to obsessively diffuse everything down into categories of just one or two articles. It also warrants mention that in addition to these, the creator also created well over 80 other categories for other Danish municipalities that had no articles filed in them at all, and have had to be speedy deleted as empty categories — but even if these were justified, the rule still wouldn't be "create the entire set right off the bat even if some of the categories remain empty" anyway, and a category cannot exist at all until it has actual content. Bearcat (talk) 18:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:34, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: As I said above, I am currently working on translating hundreds of articles from the Danish Wikipedia about the parishes, and these categories will be helpful, however if these are deleted I will understand. However, I am against deleting the ones which sort them into diocese. greyzxq  talk 18:48, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * When we do have hundreds of articles to be subcategorized like this, then you're free to create the needed categories. But no, you do not get to create hundreds of empty or underpopulated categories first and then populate them later — you create the articles first and then the subcategories may follow only once they can be populated with five or six or ten or twenty articles right off the bat. It's "the articles come first and the categories wait until the content already exists to be filed in them", not "the categories come first and the articles to populate them with happen later". That is, you get these hundreds of articles in place first, and then you can sweep back through them to recategorize them by diocese or municipality after the articles are all already in place. Bearcat (talk) 19:23, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * We're willing to reassess after that happens of course. But categories are for navigation for readers to find existing articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:09, 20 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete most subcats: I would support deleting most of the subcategories, but oppose the deletion of the main category and the Aabenraa and Horsens subcategories, because those subcats have more than one article in them, and I'll focus on adding to those two first. I oppose the deletion of the main category because it's good for sorting, and in future will definitely be added to. greyzxq  talk 21:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * This discussion will not be closed within the coming week. If by the time of closure those two subcategories contain 5 articles then just leave them alone. In that case Category:Parishes in Denmark by municipality should be merged to Category:Parishes of Denmark rather than deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:35, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:50, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge — if any contain 5 or more articles (not stubs), then re-parent to.
 * Merge with 1 Exception The Aabenraa one should be retained as it has 5+ articles and reparented. The rest serve no navigational purpose at this time. - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:09, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment - since this category was nominated, I have created articles for all the parishes in Aabenraa Municipality (20) and Ærø Municipality (6). I will continue work on filling the others ASAP. greyzxq  talk 21:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Still not finding any translated articles. Seems like a mechanically generated stub template. All orphans. were all these new stub categories approved? Category:Region of Southern Denmark stubs?


 * Merge each to the equivalent towns and settlements in Foo (or populated places, or similar). Formal status as a parish (as opposed to a place) may not be significant.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:18, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * you'd better create 1 good English-language article instead of 20 poor articles. Quality is more important than quantity. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:43, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * If you look on the Danish Wiki you'll see that I don't have much to work with. greyzxq  talk 07:57, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * If even the people who are by far the most likely to be able to write anything of substance about Danish parishes still can't be arsed to write anything more than "this is a thing that exists, the end", then the question you should really be asking yourself is whether the English translations are warranted at all. Bearcat (talk) 12:42, 27 February 2023 (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:Pakistani power station stubs

 * 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)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:05, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Pakistani power station stubs to Category:Power station stubs and Category:Pakistani building and structure stubs
 * Propose merging Category:Taiwanese power station stubs to Category:Power station stubs and Category:Taiwanese building and structure stubs
 * Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated stub categories with no evidence of approval by WikiProject Stub Sorting. As always, the bar for the creation of a stub category is 60 articles, not just one, but these both have less than half of that -- and for that very reason, stub categories require approval from WikiProject Stub sorting before they can be created, and are not free for just any user to create on a personal whim. So these should both just be upmerged to the parent categories, and are not justified until another 30 to 40 articles can be found to populate them above the required minimum size. Bearcat (talk) 17:47, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:36, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Upmerge per nom. Her Pegship (?) 21:33, 20 February 2023 (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:Israeli power station stubs

 * 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)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:05, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Israeli power station stubs to Category:Power station stubs and Category:Israeli building and structure stubs
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, newly created to overcategorize just one article with no evidence of approval by WikiProject Stub Sorting. As always, stub categories are not free for just any user to arbitrarily create for just one or two articles in an area of personal interest -- the bar for the creation of a stub category is 60 articles, not just one, and accordingly the creation of a stub category has to be approved before it can be implemented. But even a search through both and  failed to find even one other article that could be resorted here, let alone the 59 other articles it would take to legitimize retention -- so the page should just be upmerged to the parent categories rather than having its own dedicated category of one. Bearcat (talk) 17:42, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:37, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Upmerge per nom. Her Pegship (?) 21:33, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge per nom. List of power stations in Israel has fewer than 15 entries. Thryduulf (talk) 13:01, 22 February 2023 (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:Penjara F.C. players
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Penjara F.C. players

Category:MacOS-only software
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:MacOS-only software

Category:Mahan confederacy rulers

 * 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 & reparent. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:08, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Mahan confederacy rulers to Category:Monarchs of the Mahan confederacy
 * Nominator's rationale: rename, "monarchs" is more specific than "rulers"; and re-parent to Category:Korean monarchs insread of Category:Rulers. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:04, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:29, 19 February 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 10:01, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Rename and re-parent.
 * Support for already stated reasons Freedom4U (talk) 15:03, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Alternative: Rename to Category:Mahan confederacy monarchs per alignment with List of Mahan confederacy monarchs (previously suggested in my Rulers CfD), Rename and re-parent per nom. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:21, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * (as nom) I do not greatly object to Category:Mahan confederacy monarchs, just think that Category:Monarchs of the Mahan confederacy sounds slightly better. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:58, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I object, because "Mahan confederacy" is not a demonym. Therefore, naming guidelines append the regime, as in "Roman Empire" and "Confederate States of America".
 * Very well, then I support renaming and re-parenting per nom, and moving List of Mahan confederacy monarchs to List of monarchs of the Mahan confederacy. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:14, 26 February 2023 (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:IPhone video game engines
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:IPhone video game engines

Category:Former Liang rulers

 * 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: reparent and rename to Category:Monarchs of Former Liang. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:54, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Former Liang rulers to Category:Princes of Former Liang
 * Nominator's rationale: rename, "princes" is more accurate than "rulers"; and re-parent to Category:Chinese princes instead of Category:Rulers. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:42, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:29, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * (revised) Rename and re-parent.
 * Oppose The Former Liang article itself states that the Former Liang was a dynastic state, not a principality. Plus, wang is usually translated as king, while gong 公 is usually translated as prince, and the first ruler of the state proclaimed himself wang. The proposed name won't help, it will only confuse people. Why use "prince" or "king" when you can just use "ruler"? The category on Chinese Wikipedia, uses 君主, which is translated as "ruler". Mucube (talk • contribs) 16:47, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Several articles mention prince. If that is wrong, rename to Category:Monarchs of Former Liang and re-parent to Category:Chinese monarchs. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:47, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * "Ruler" is still the best word in my opinion because they never declared themselves emperor, but "monarch" could also be okay. At the very least, it shouldn't be a subcategory of Category:Chinese princes because it includes both sons of emperors and princes that ruled their own country but just happened to use the "prince" title. Mucube (talk • contribs) 18:52, 23 February 2023 (UTC)


 *  Alternative proposal: Rename Category:Former Liang rulers to Category:Former Liang royalty as proposed in my CfD on Category:Rulers. As I said over there: I think it's worth noting that English (and other Western) literature tends to be inconsistent in translating Chinese noble titles. For the Sixteen Kingdoms, a lot of "rulers" carried or claimed the title 王 ("wang", see en:wikt:王), which is variously primarily translated as [1] "king, monarch", or [2] "duke, prince". This is inconsistency is reflected in the subcats of Category:Sixteen Kingdoms rulers: "Former Liang rulers‎, Northern Liang princes‎, Sixteen Kingdoms emperors‎, Sixteen Kingdoms regents, Southern Liang (Sixteen Kingdoms) princes‎, Western Liang (Sixteen Kingdoms) dukes‎, Western Qin princes‎, Western Yan rulers". I haven't checked, but apart from "emperors" and "regents", I suspect that each of these catnames was based on the Mandarin Chinese term 王 "wang". Renaming all of them to "royalty", just like the grandparent category, seems like a good pragmatic solution to avoid having to choose an exact translation of 王 "wang" and checking each item in each (sub)category if it applies in each specific case. So I disagree with Mucube's suggestions; neither "king" nor "prince" nor "ruler" is a good idea, because each of them will just create all the problems we can already see in my CfD. "monarch" isn't my favourite alternative, because it usually means a reigning sovereign, so lots of princes and princesses who never reigned could be mislabelled. Hence my proposal for "royalty", just like the grandparent Category:Sixteen Kingdoms royalty, which solves all these issues. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Update: I now support William Allen Simpson's proposal to Rename Category:Monarchs of Former Liang and re-parent to Category:Chinese monarchs. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:37, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * however this category does not contain any princes and princesses who never reigned, does it? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:02, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * This should not be done because the Sixteen Kingdoms royalty category includes non-reigning royalty (e.g. Category:Northern Liang princesses) Mucube (talk • contribs) 22:12, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Interesting, you gave me stuff to think about. I've done some more reading and comparing, and I'd like to share some observations.
 * If the goal is to limit ourselves to reigning royalty, then "royalty" might not be a good option. As you are both saying, the term "royalty" may be ambiguous: the disambiguation page Royalty indicates the term can mean either/both [1] Any individual monarch, such as a king, queen, emperor, empress, etc., or/and [2] Royal family, the immediate family of a king or queen regnant, and sometimes his or her extended family.
 * On the other hand, there are two people in the current category, Zhang Gui and Zhang Shi (Former Liang), who were not "reigning" either; they governed as "Inspector of Liang Province". As the bio of Zhang Mao says, he was the commonly accepted first ruler of the Chinese Former Liang state. So either his predecessors shouldn't be in this category (Zhang Gui and Zhang Shi should be excluded), or we should make it broader to include such non-reigning royal family members.
 * I see now that 3 out of 5 people in Category:Northern Liang princes are called a "king" in their bio's opening sentence (Duan Ye, Juqu Mengxun and Juqu Mujian), even though they are in a category of "princes"; 1 more is called a "ruler" and the last one is actually the only one identified as a "prince". This confirms to me that "prince" is still a bad alternative; with centuries of English/Western literature inconsistently translating 王 "wang" as "king", "duke", and "prince", I don't think we have much hope of trying to solve it here by opting for "prince".
 * The term that Mucube says the Chinese Wikipedia category uses, en:wikt:君主 (jūnzhǔ), is translated as monarch; sovereign; king; ruler. "Monarch" is the first choice, "ruler" only the fourth. So "monarchs" is a better option than both "rulers" and "princes" (which isn't even mentioned, except, weirdly enough, as the Chinese trans-title for Macchiavelli's book The Prince).
 * Almost all people in the Category:Sixteen Kingdoms rulers also have a Template:S-roy|ch at the bottom, which identifies them as "Chinese royalty", which itself is a link to List of Chinese monarchs. So according to this widespread template system, "Chinese royalty" are "Chinese monarchs". So as far as the bottom template system is concerned, there isn't actually much difference between "monarchs" and "royalty".
 * Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:03, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Oops, I messed my Chinese up. 统治者 is ruler, not 君主, which is monarch.
 * As for Zhang Gui and Zhang Shi, I think that they should still be counted as rulers of Former Liang. Zhang Mao was "the commonly accepted first ruler of the Former Liang state" but he also shared the Duke of Xiping title with all of the rest of the Former Liang rulers and Zhang Gui and Zhang Shi. And the Former Liang article itself says that the Former Liang itself was mostly a titular Eastern Jin vassal state, so there really isn't much of a difference with Zhang Gui and Zhang Shi and the rest of the rulers since they all were titularly subservient to the Eastern Jin by holding the Duke of Xiping title anyway. Plus, the Zhang Mao article only says he was the "commonly accepted" first Former Liang ruler. Zhang Zuo was the only one to formally break away from the Eastern Jin.
 * "Ruler" is still the best option in my opinion as "monarch", strictly speaking, would only include Zhang Zuo, the only person to formally declare himself emperor (or wang, depending on the source) Mucube (talk • contribs) 04:47, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks for that correction. en:wikt:統治者 (traditional) and en:wikt:统治者 (simplified) both transcribe as en:wikt:tǒngzhìzhě (pinyin), meaning ruler (a person exercising government or dominion). It comes from the verb en:wikt:統治/en:wikt:统治/en:wikt:tǒngzhì: to govern; to rule; to preside over; to control; to dominate. As I argued extensively at the (recently relisted) Rulers CfD (points A, B, and C), these nouns and verbs are way too vague and ambiguous to use as categorisation, because they make no clear distinction
 * between head of state and head of government (does a prime minister "rule"? See the example of Mussolini vs. Victor Emmanuel III of Italy);
 * whether the position is totally sovereign or still (significantly) limited (e.g. absolute monarch or military dictator vs constitutional monarch/president);
 * whether one "owns/reigns" or "serves/governs" a country (a monarch "owns/reigns", a president "serves/governs");
 * whether the position is seized illegitimately (by force or coup, e.g. a warlord or military dictator), is inherited dynastically (e.g. a king), is appointed through some mechanism (e.g. through rotation in Switzerland), or elected through some voting system (e.g. parliamentary vote in Germany, popular vote in France or the United States, cardinal conclave in Vatican City), and whether the term is lifelong (most monarchies) or legally/constitutionally limited for a set period of time (a few years in most modern republics).
 * So no, I think "ruler" (統治者/统治者/tǒngzhìzhě) is a very bad option. And as you said yourself, the linked Chinese Wikipedia category is zh:Category:前凉君主, which is literally "Former Liang monarch" (君主 jūnzhǔ).
 * I also see no reason for categorising people such as Zhang Gui and Zhang Shi as "monarchs" (or "rulers") if they are not commonly accepted as such; it would mean the Wikipedia categorisation defies historical consensus, which is tantamount to WP:OR. If we want to group people who held the title of 西平郡公 (Xīpíng jùngōng, "Duke of Xiping"), then the right course of action is creating a Category:Dukes of Xiping. The fact that Zhang Gui and Zhang Shi were posthumously proclaimed to be 王 (wang) doesn't count either; these are symbolic titles that don't change historical facts. Compare e.g. Category:Cao Wei emperors; it doesn't include Cao Cao, even though his son and successor Cao Pi declared himself "Emperor Wen of Wei" (魏文帝) a few months after Cao Cao's death and posthumously declared his father "Emperor Wu of Wei" (魏武帝). Wikipedia categorises people according to how their occupation during their lifetime (which in Cao Cao's case includes "3rd-century heads of government, Han dynasty politicians/prime ministers/warlords, Politicians from Bozhou, Political office-holders in Hebei/Shandong, Regents of China", but not "Cao Wei emperors"). So it would also be an option to include Gui and Shi in Category:Jin dynasty (266–420) politicians and Category:Political office-holders in Gansu instead, for example, just like Cao Cao.
 * Incidentally, I note that both Category:Former Liang rulers‎ and Category:Former Liang princesses are already subcats of Category:Jin dynasty (266–420) people, and they are almost the only subcategories there which currently do not contain the phrase Jin dynasty (266–420) in their names, so in that sense they already appear the odd ones out. These people appear to be much more Eastern Jin than the subcategories seem to suggest. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:24, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Update: I now support William Allen Simpson's proposal to Rename Category:Monarchs of Former Liang and re-parent to Category:Chinese monarchs. But I still think Zhang Gui and Zhang Shi should be excluded, and that they are better placed in other categories such as those I have proposed in my previous comment. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:37, 25 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Comment – re-reading the above, Sixteen Kingdoms is wrongly named? Dynasties in Chinese history were not "monarchical", because the "kings" were sometime translated "dukes", "princes", and one "emperor"?
 * Rather, see Chinese sovereign for a varied list of titles.
 * Chinese Wikipedia uses 君主, translated as "monarch".
 * This was a "kingdom", thus a Monarchy, according to historians and WP:RS.
 * They are all "hereditary monarchs". Monarchs, as such, bear a variety of titles – king or queen, prince or princess (e.g., Sovereign Prince of Monaco), emperor or empress (e.g., Emperor of China, Emperor of Ethiopia, Emperor of Japan, Emperor of India), archduke, duke or grand duke (e.g., Grand Duke of Luxembourg), emir (e.g., Emir of Qatar), sultan (e.g., Sultan of Oman), or pharaoh.
 * Therefore, there's no good reason to divide this fairly small category into exact English translations of the actual titles.
 * William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:28, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Regarding your comment on the name "Sixteen Kingdoms", indeed it may well be a misnomer in Western historiography of China. en:wikt:國/en:wikt:国 "guó" means country; nation; nation-state; kingdom. "Kingdom" is the least favoured translation and for good reason, not least because the Mandarin Chinese name for China is 中国/中國 (Zhōngguó, literally "middle country", "the country of the centre"). (Although the simplified character 国 appears to derive from en:wikt:囯, a compound of 囗 ("to surround, enclosure, city wall") + 王 (wang “king/prince/duke”), the traditional character 國 is a compound of 囗 ("to surround, enclosure, city wall") + en:wikt:或, from 戈 ("dagger-axe (used to defend the territory)"); so while the former seems to signify the territory of a wang, which seems like L'État, c'est moi, the latter signifies a city/territory that defends itself against threats from outside, which seems more like a res publica). And both the People's Republic of China and Republic of China are, well, republics, not monarchies/kingdoms. (And so unsurprisingly, the traditional character 國 is found in the most common words for "republic", namely en:wikt:民國 mínguó and en:共和國 gònghéguó) The alternative term mentioned in the lead of Sixteen Kingdoms, "Sixteen States", is far more accurate, but per WP:COMMONNAME I'm afraid we're stuck with "Sixteen Kingdoms" for now (just like Three Kingdoms, which I suspect may never change because of how deeply entrenched that term is in English literature). Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:52, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:45, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Rename Category:Monarchs of Former Liang and re-parent to Category:Chinese monarchs — suggested alternative by, and "could also be okay", and  #4 and #5.
 * Strongly support this proposal. I arrived at the same conclusion in the exchange above, and I will retract my own "royalty" proposal. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:29, 25 February 2023 (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:Greece in the Roman era
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Greece in the Roman era

Category:Tungus rulers

 * 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)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:18, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Tungus rulers to Category:Rulers
 * Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:07, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support — one step in a long process.
 * Support -- in this case the only content is Category:Jurchen rulers, so that this seems to be a redundant layer. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:03, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom and WP:OCEGRS. Perhaps Category:Jurchen rulers should also be nominated per WP:OCEGRS? At my Rulers CfD (#11), I had suggested renaming it to Category:Jurchen monarchs, but given this CfD and WP:OCEGRS, should it also be merged to Category:Rulers? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:30, 23 February 2023 (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:Geoparks in Iceland

 * 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)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:19, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting geoparks in iceland
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. One article to be upmerged to parent category/categories. Estopedist1 (talk) 10:39, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support per nom, but merge to Category:Geoparks in Europe and Category:Protected areas of Iceland. Many siblings in this category tree should be nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:26, 19 February 2023 (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:Jurchen history in film
<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: delete. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:19, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting jurchen history in film
 * Propose deleting jurchen history in television
 * Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:38, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete Redundant. Mucube (talk • contribs) 00:33, 21 February 2023 (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:Funerals in Iceland
<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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:22, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting Category:Funerals in Iceland to Category:Funerals and Category:Historical events in Iceland and Category:Death in Iceland
 * Propose deleting Category:Funerals in Sweden to Category:Sweden and Category:Historical events in Sweden and Category:Death in Sweden
 * Propose deleting Category:Funerals in Turkey to Category:Turkey and Category:Historical events in Turkey and Category:Death in Turkey


 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. One article to be upmerged to parent category/categories. Estopedist1 (talk) 10:38, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. As one parent category has been nominated too, merge to Category:Events in Iceland, Category:Death in Iceland and Category:Funerals. Many siblings in this category tree may be nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:31, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge per Marcocapelle, not delete. "Delete" means removing the contents from the category and its parent hierarchies. – Fayenatic  L ondon 08:01, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * For the parent that was nominated, see Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 18, and in that case I have nominated several siblings too. But in this case the siblings with one member do not hold generic articles like this one, but state funerals. Rather than merge those, it would be better to rename them to State funerals; see now Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 20. – Fayenatic  L ondon 15:06, 20 February 2023 (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:Folk high schools in Iceland
<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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:23, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting folk high schools in iceland
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. One article to be upmerged to parent category/categories. Estopedist1 (talk) 10:37, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom, to Category:Folk high schools and Category:Schools in Iceland. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:09, 19 February 2023 (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:Private schools in Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Private schools in Iceland

Category:Disaster prevention in Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Disaster prevention in Iceland

Category:Defunct video game companies of Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Defunct video game companies of Iceland

Category:Defence of Iceland
<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: keep. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:25, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting defence of iceland
 * Nominator's rationale: "Defence of Foo" is rather unused (three times) phrase in our category system and probably linguistically ambigious as well.

To be deleted along with
 * Category:Defence of the Falkland Islands (redundant redirect)
 * Category:Defence of London

To be upmerged: military of Foo, or military history of Foo, respectively Estopedist1 (talk) 10:28, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose - 'Defence of Iceland' was a recent cfd decision: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_June_4#Military_of_Iceland. Oculi (talk) 14:49, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose -- The Iceland category is well populated, as is London (though it is an unusual category). Falklands Islands is a redirect (so that it will not be inadvertently re-created and repopulated.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:23, 19 February 2023 (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:Rulers of Lampang
<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: keep for now. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:26, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting rulers of lampang
 * Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only one article in the category. Possibly add that article to Category:People from Lampang province. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:49, 19 February 2023 (UTC) As for the SMALLCAT concerns, I think local rulers in Thai history form a potential tree that still needs to be systematically organized, though there are few articles at present. Here's an example of how some existing articles could be categorized:<ul><li>Category:Rulers of Nakhon Si Thammarat (Yamada Nagamasa, Chaophraya Nakhon (Noi), Chaophraya Nakhon (Nu))</li> PS I just noticed the Rulers discussion. While I agree that Rulers is vague and wouldn't mind reparenting, I don't think there's a better option here, as the status of these local rulers was highly variable across both place and time. Some were officially regarded as royalty; others weren't, though some were practically hereditary royal clans but in name. Some are called governors in modern English-language sources, others princes and sometimes kings, and there's often no agreement between sources. Rulers, which is used by sources, is IMO a necessary compromise term. --Paul_012 (talk) 06:25, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete — added to both Category:People from Lampang province and a parent of this category, so the stub will not be lost in the shuffle.
 * Comment: This category should also include Kawila, and has several other potential members listed at List of rulers of Lan Na. I've reverted William Allen Simpson's addition of Thipchang to Category:People from Lampang province as anachronistic, since the category concerns the modern entity.
 * Category:Rulers of Phitsanulok (Chaophraya Phitsanulok, Maha Sura Singhanat)
 * Category:Rulers of Phra Tabong or Category:Rulers of Battambang under Siamese rule (Ang Em (prince), Chaophraya Aphaiphubet (Baen))
 * Category:Rulers of Ranong (Khaw Soo Cheang, Phraya Ratsadanupradit Mahitsaraphakdi)</ul>If these are not enough to constitute an exemption under SMALLCAT, they should be covered under an umbrella Category:Local rulers in the history of Thailand or some similar title. --Paul_012 (talk) 06:00, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Those who rule have a completely different status from those who are ruled. As titles may vary, with changes in status, the vague "rulers" has much to commend it, provided the people in question are not already categorised by another title.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:01, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep for now per my above comment. I'll create and populate the categories I suggested above once this is closed, and perhaps that'll help provide better perspective on how to deal with them as a whole. No prejudice against later re-nominating all of them as a group. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:41, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Withdraw nomination, in order to give User:Paul_012 the opportunity to reorganize. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:54, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment I see this situation has gotten quite complicated, so I'm not taking a stance. I would just add that at my Rulers CfD, I had suggested it be merged into Category:Lan Na royalty. That's one option Paul 012 might want to consider; I'd prefer that over something vague and verbose like "Local rulers in the history of Thailand" (before you know it, it includes the chief of a 10-people village); let's be more WP:PRECISE. Otherwise I agree with Marcocapelle to give Paul 012 the time to reorganise (good luck!). Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:41, 23 February 2023 (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:Databases in Iceland
<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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:27, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting databases in iceland
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. One article to be upmerged to parent category/categories. Estopedist1 (talk) 10:22, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge to Category:Science and technology in Iceland and Category:Databases. Many siblings in this category tree should be nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:55, 19 February 2023 (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:Darts in Iceland
<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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:28, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting darts in iceland
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. One article to be upmerged to parent category/categories. Estopedist1 (talk) 10:22, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge to Category:Sport in Iceland. Quite a few siblings in this category tree should be nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:58, 19 February 2023 (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:Dairy products companies of Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Dairy products companies of Iceland

Category:Convention centers in Iceland
<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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:28, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting convention centers in iceland
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. One article to be upmerged to parent category/categories. Estopedist1 (talk) 10:19, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge to Category:Convention centers per nom. Many siblings in this category tree should be nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:11, 19 February 2023 (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:Rulers of the Kingdom of Marwar
<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: rename (updated) and reparent. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:29, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Rulers of the Kingdom of Marwar to
 * Category:Kings of Marwar re-parent to Category:Asian kings
 * Category:Monarchs of Marwar re-parent to Category:Asian monarchs
 * Nominator's rationale: rename, "kings" is more specific than "ruler" (and besides the proposed name is quite a bit shorter); and re-parent to Category:Asian kings instead of Category:Rulers. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:18, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:32, 19 February 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:58, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Rename and re-parent.
 * Oppose as proposed. None of the members are actually titled as kings. The list at Kingdom of Marwar only has rao, raja, sawai raja and maharaja. I wouldn't be opposed to using monarchs, as it does seem to describe those titles. --Paul_012 (talk) 06:07, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, I am fine with that too. In that case, re-parent to Category:Asian monarchs. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:34, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with that, too. Updated the nomination. Translations can be nebulous.


 * Support rename to Category:Monarchs of Marwar and re-parent to Category:Asian monarchs. Just before I read this nomination, I had made pretty much the same points below at as Paul 012 does here. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:47, 24 February 2023 (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:Conspiracy theories in Iceland
<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: delete. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:31, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting conspiracy theories in iceland
 * Propose deleting icelandic conspiracy theorists
 * Nominator's rationale: redundant category layer. One article to be merged into Category:Icelandic activists and Category:Conspiracy theorists Estopedist1 (talk) 10:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I guess your intention was to nominate the subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:14, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * yes, of course. I guess it is easily understandable Estopedist1 (talk) 18:01, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support — tagged the subcategories and updated the nomination. Multi-category nominations are not obvious. No need to add Category:Icelandic activists, as this a former prime minister. Really not a conspiracy theorist, either; just a sore loser.


 * 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:Confectionery companies of Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Confectionery companies of Iceland

Category:Beer festivals in Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Beer festivals in Iceland

Category:Animal welfare organizations based in Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Animal welfare organizations based in Iceland

Category:American football in Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:American football in Iceland

Category:Rulers of Ladakh
<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: rename & reparent (as per nom). (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Rulers of Ladakh to Category:Kings of Ladakh
 * Nominator's rationale: rename, "kings" is more specific than "ruler"; and re-parent to Category:Asian kings instead of Category:Rulers. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:54, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Rename and re-parent.
 * Alternative: I'm not opposed to the proposal, I just think rename to Category:Monarchs of Ladakh is better (previously suggested as #14 of the Rulers CfD). A re-parenting seems unnecessary, as it is already in Category:Indian monarchs (which is in the grandparent Category:Asian monarchs, which is also the grandparent of Category:Asian kings). Generally speaking, there aren't major differences between "monarch" and "king", except that "monarch" has a more refined theoretical, philosophical, political-scientific meaning, whereas "king" is laden with a lot more Western/European baggage (especially from the Germanic languages it stems from), and I would be hesitant to apply a strongly Eurocentric framework to Asian historical contexts. Just like with the Chinese (Former Liang) case of translating "wang" according to medieval European terminology (king? prince? duke?), we may end up creating more problems than we solve. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:37, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * PS: I see a similar move has already happened above at the, where Paul 012 made much the points as I did here. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:42, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * (as nom) "monarchs" is a second best option - in English these monarchs are mostly described as "king". Marcocapelle (talk) 05:09, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Looks like you're right. Gyalpo as a title is pretty consistently translated as "king" in English texts as far as I can tell. The predicate "Lhachen" and the word "Namgyal" after a Ladakhi monarch's name appear to indicate their dynasty, not their title (although this does make Lhachen Gyalpo a weird one: apparently "King" was his given name according to this logic). In that case, if "king" feels more natural to the English reader and is more in line with English literature, this rename seems fine to me. I see you have already removed the "Category:Rulers", but kept the "Category:Indian monarchs", so adding "Category:Asian kings" seems fine; the Ladakhi kings were both Asian kings and Indian monarchs. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:09, 24 February 2023 (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:1st millennium in Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:1st millennium in Iceland

Category:Belarusian rulers
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Belarusian rulers

Category:Proposed energy infrastructure in Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Proposed energy infrastructure in Iceland

Category:Plastics companies of Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Plastics companies of Iceland

Category:Filling stations in Iceland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Filling stations in Iceland

Category:Ontologists and Category:Metaphysics writers
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 27%23Category:Ontologists and Category:Metaphysics writers

Category:Strong women (influencers)
<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: delete. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:40, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting strong women (influencers)
 * Nominator's rationale: Unclear inclusion criteria. DrKay (talk) 08:06, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I planned to populate this category - Categories provide a discriminating identity, which facilitates peer association. All women are amazing not just those who are celebrated or notorious.  But women who inspire through career (writing, acting, singing, dancing, science, politicking, feminism) are already associated by category.  But there is a group of women, real and fictional, who inspire just because they took control of their lives despite traditional cultural norms, like aviators, engineers, scientists, artists and philosophers or because they made a difference.  This category seeks to identity potential role models, good and bad, who might otherwise go unnoticed or those who are noticed (Queen Elizabeth I) but still change the way behaviours are set in a cultural context. Geneus01 (talk) 09:37, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The key for me is granularity (in definition) - categories are exclusive but in easily identifiable ways - this proposal may be unmanageable because it may be too inclusive. Social media may have co-opted the term "influencer" but we can substitute with "icon" "exemplar" but influencer speaks to the (modern) audience - who influenced you and that can be historical (Queen Elizabeth I).  I bow to consensus (no agenda here) because each selection constitutes a judgment, which is inherently subjective. Geneus01 (talk) 10:06, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support, there is only one article in the category and it is totally unclear why it is there. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:53, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Working on it through collaborative definition Geneus01 (talk) 09:46, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * You'd better write an article about the topic and make sure it is properly sourced before "working on a definition". Marcocapelle (talk) 15:22, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The more I think about this, the more I agree with you - this category would make an interesting article - I admit, I created it on a whim without knowing the process (if I were to relaunch it, perhaps I would call it Strong women (historic influencers)). Diana Caldwell reminded me that women are often remembered for notoriety simply because they used their natural attributes (beauty, skills or intelligence) to distort cultural norms that didn’t allow them to be acknowledged for those attributes beyond the affront they presented.  These women were often overlooked, dismissed, vilified, even burned at the stake, for being better than their male peers because they didn’t conform to what was expected of women of their time.  I am researching Lady Elizabeth Hatton, who falls squarely into this category.  What I would like is for others to recognise the “genre” and attribute other contenders tarred with the same brush by history. Geneus01 (talk) 11:16, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I will stall population until the category itself is accepted as valid (Erin Brockovich, Golda Meir, Amelia Earhart, Marie Curie, Christine Keeler, Elizabeth I, Ray Costelloe....) Geneus01 (talk) 10:00, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * This list can be described as women role models. In other words, women who have Wikipedia articles. We already have a category for that: . Place Clichy (talk) 15:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 17:41, 19 February 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 08:44, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Place Clichy (talk) 15:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete — WP:SUBJECTIVECAT
 * Oppose Historical women whose actions changed social norms and became role-models, icons or exemplars of behaviours that changed how people saw women's roles in society, despite having no identifiable profession or skill associated with their notability (like Diana Caldwell) and are essentially orphaned by existing categories despite having something in common that merits grouping (IMHO). I do support the opinion of the majority (this being the only category I have ever proposed).Geneus01 (talk) 06:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Category size is currently 2. Diana Caldwell is already in several categories, as a libertine, mistress, and socialite. There's no evidence that she "influenced" anybody, or had any skill other than promiscuity in England and Africa. AFAICT, she has nothing in common with Erin Brockovich, an educated environmental activist with an identifiable profession or skill.
 * Agreed - but the terms you use are all pejorative (historical legacy) - is she not someone who just decided to possess her life (we don't judge as authors)? I have thought a bit more about the category (see response above to  Marcocapelle's observation) what do think? - are categories defined anywhere to qualify or if they need defining (as this probably does), does that make them problematical and hard to apply? Geneus01 (talk) 11:23, 20 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Act - Well guys - I blundered in to categories so I may as well blunder out.  There are more categories in heaven than there are articles in Wikipedia but as uniqueness is the enemy of identity and we use categories to identify, one less will do no harm.  I will propose deletion of the eponymous category if that is still the view of those who proposed to do so.  Having viewed all the arguments, please vote with your Moniker and I will act on your decision. Geneus01 (talk) 07:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * You do not need to act. The discussion will be closed and consensus will be implemented by an editor who was not involved in this discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:19, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay - thanks for that...Geneus01 (talk) 07:27, 21 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. We might get Category:Real men (smart guys), Category:Beautiful paintings (aesthetically pleasing) and Category:Cool films (fun to watch) next. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:17, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Good point (lol) - but in fairness, I am looking at disruptors - the agents of change; individuals who presented us with a mirror and invited us to take a long hard look at ourselves. Geneus01 (talk) 06:36, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Which is a very interesting topic, and one you should definitely write about in one or more articles! Unfortunately, such a concept probably defies categorisation. Exactly because such individuals change the way we think about things, they disrupt established patterns of thinking, including categories. It may be that we can only properly categorise them once the dust settles down. Wikipedia follows reliable sources, it doesn't lead, let alone rush ahead. So again I would encourage you to write about these female agents of change, and perhaps the appropriate categories will eventually emerge out of what they publish and others publish about them. Good luck! Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:41, 26 February 2023 (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:Burials at Graceland Cemetery (Washington, D.C.)
<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: delete. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:40, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose Deleting Category:Burials at Graceland Cemetery (Washington, D.C.)
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING (akin to WP:PERFCAT)
 * The biography articles in this category were buried at the short-lived Graceland Cemetery (Washington, D.C.) in 1879, 1882, 1887, and 1892 but all the remains were relocated by the late 1890s. (A 5th person may or may not have been buried there for about a year.) This seems non-defining since all of these articles are also in the cemetery category for wherever their remains ended up. The category contents are already listified in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:12, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 08:50, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete — do not categorize every detail, a list is enough.


 * 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:Commonwealth War Graves Commission Crosses of Sacrifice
<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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:41, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose Merging Category:Commonwealth War Graves Commission Crosses of Sacrifice to Category:Commonwealth War Graves Commission memorials
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT
 * The Cross of Sacrifice is a type of monument placed in each cemetery of the Commonwealth War Graves Commission so they're quite common. The problem is that, while the cemeteries are individually notable and have Wikipedia articles, the crosses aren't so there's only 1 article. (The Gibraltar Cross of Sacrifice is individually notable because it was relocated from the cemetery to become a stand-alone monument.) No objection to recreating later if 5+ articles ever get created. - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:12, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:56, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support -- The prsent category is too specific. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:26, 19 February 2023 (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:Treasure Planet characters
<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: delete. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:42, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting treasure planet characters
 * Nominator's rationale: While all of these characters are present in the adaptation in some form, none of the entries are the characters from this adaptation, but the generic character pages. It is unneeded with Category:Treasure Island characters existing. (Oinkers42) (talk) 01:50, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support None of these are the specific Disney characters.★Trekker (talk) 15:26, 19 February 2023 (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:Sports competitions in Aveiro, Portugal
<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/delete. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:42, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Sports competitions in Aveiro, Portugal to Category:Sport in Aveiro, Portugal
 * Propose deleting events in aveiro, portugal
 * Propose merging Category:Sports competitions in Portimão to Category:Sport in Portimão
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. Only two articles in each sports competitions category. –Aidan721 (talk) 01:02, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:01, 19 February 2023 (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:Sports competitions in Weert
<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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:43, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Sports competitions in Weert to Category:Sport in Weert and Category:Sports competitions in Limburg (Netherlands)
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. One article. –Aidan721 (talk) 00:58, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:01, 19 February 2023 (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:Sports competitions in Valkenswaard
<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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Sports competitions in Valkenswaard to Category:Sport in Valkenswaard and Category:Sports competitions in North Brabant
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. One article and one sub-cat. –Aidan721 (talk) 00:51, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:02, 19 February 2023 (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:American writers of Native American descent
<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: delete. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:45, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting american writers of native american descent
 * Nominator's rationale There is already a category for Category:Native American writers. There is no reason for a category of non-Native writers who claim to have Native ancestry. There is no other category by occupation for people of self-identified Native American ancestry. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 00:43, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 17:21, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose I can understand your rationale, but what I think it may be slightly different than non-Native people claiming to be Native. For example in the category "American writers of Jamaican descent" we have Colin Powell who does not claim to be Jamaican as far as I know. There may be writers who have some more distant Native descent who do not claim it as an identity. Is it relevant to their being a writer? Perhaps, if it's mentioned in their article. But ... as I said I weakly oppose deleting it, if people really think it's a useless category I won't make fuss.
 * Dan Carkner (talk) 00:53, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * If Colin Powell's Jamaican ancestry has no relation whatsoever to his written work, then he should probably not be in Category:American writers of Jamaican descent in the first place. Placing articles in categories is only ever useful if they have some actual connection with the subject of the article (as summarized in WP:CATDEF guideline). A trouble with these "intersection" categories is that their mere existence seems to be an invitation for some good-faith users to fill them regardless of that relevance. There is some argument that categories for the intersection of occupation and ancestry should probably in general not even be created, with some limited exceptions (see WP:OCEGRS). Place Clichy (talk) 15:20, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Colin Powell is notably of Scottish descent, and has a coat of arms granted in 2004. Yet the occupation categories are "Jamaican descent". Jamaican is never mentioned in the article regarding "politician" nor "writer". Merely used as racist classification. Gone!
 * Fair enough. Probably the right choice to get rid of it then. Dan Carkner (talk) 00:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 17:06, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:05, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. They can use Category:American people of Native American descent or Category:American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent instead. oncamera  <i style="color:#ad0076; font-family:georgia">(talk page)</i> 12:09, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Writers can probably be defined by who they are, not who their ancestors were. Place Clichy (talk) 15:20, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete — this is the evil one drop rule in reverse. 1/16? WP:COP-HERITAGE: The heritage of grandparents is never defining and rarely notable. [...] Categories that intersect heritage with occupation, residence, or other such categories should only be created where that combination is itself recognized as a distinct and unique cultural topic in its own right....
 * Comment -- I understand that having some Native American ancestry is not all that uncommon in the parts of US settled in the 19th century. We should however discourage the use of descent categories where the ancestry is far back and only a small fraction.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:31, 19 February 2023 (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:Sports competitions in Papendrecht
<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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:45, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Sports competitions in Papendrecht to Category:Sport in Papendrecht and Category:Sports competitions in South Holland
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. One article. –Aidan721 (talk) 00:39, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:05, 19 February 2023 (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.