Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 4



Category:Wikipedians who have access to Informit

 * 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  12:24, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Wikipedians who have access to Informit to Category:Wikipedians who have access to Informit (database)
 * Nominator's rationale: Unclear what of the 3 options at Informit this refers to. Gonnym (talk) 07:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  23:33, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom. VegaDark (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It does not matter to rename or not, as I am the only one in the category. I think disambiguation is not really required, as the other two options are very unlikely! Informit database was available via the Australian National Library. Also I could easily just drop the category from my page and let it be deleted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete. Only one user in the categopry, who created it, and has said above they're ok with removal. Kbdank71 03:12, 5 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:Croatian writers from Bosnia and Herzegovina

 * 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 to Category:Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina writers. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  12:27, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Croatian writers from Bosnia and Herzegovina to Category:Croat writers from Bosnia and Herzegovina
 * Nominator's rationale: "Croatian" refers to nation of Croatia, while this cat is about Bosnian writers of certain ethnic persuasion, namely Croat ethnic background (Bosnia is a multi-ethnic country: Bosniak, Croats, Serbs, Jews and Romas are all Bosnians) - for instance, we would say "Bosniak" writers in/from Croatia not "Bosnian" writers in/from Croatia, and so on. ౪ Santa ౪  99°  09:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 20:37, 26 January 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 02:52, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * withdrawn Speedy rename WP:C2C — match parent Category:Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina
 * Comment, it may make sense to check the articles one by one. E.g. the info box of Ivica Đikić says he has also Croatian nationality. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:57, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * No, it lists dual "citizenship", one "nationality". No idea why that's legal, but we categorize by nationality.
 * Actually I believe that Wikipedia classifies by nationality, but actually means citizenship. In the context of Eastern Europe, I believe that they use the work nationality in the meaning of ethnicity. In countries like Russia or Yugoslavia, people have (had) a nationality field on their IDs that in fact mentioned the ethnic group they were part of (such as Tatar, Bosnian Muslim etc.), next to the citizenship. I believe this is the way it should be understood in the context of this article. Place Clichy (talk) 15:08, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * In wp categories is usually taken broader than citizenship, because for many people citizenship is not known or even entirely anachronistic. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * But even if what you say is true (although I am inclined to agree with WAS explanation above), we still have both distinct categories - say, this Ivica Đikić, if he holds both citizenships, Bosnian as Croat of Bosnia and Croatian, and this dual citizenship gives us right to also categorize him as Croatian Writer, then we will simply use both cats, Croat Writer of BH and Croatian Writer (also,@Marcocapelle could be interested in this reply)). My point is that it does not matter, Croats of Bosnia are still Bosnians not Croatians (even Croatians are Croats, Jews, Romani, etc.). ౪ Santa ౪  99°  20:46, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * True, so I am supporting a rename to Croat. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:10, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Neutral. I am not sure that we should create categories for intersection of ethnicity and occupation in Bosnia and Herzegovina per WP:OCEGRS, but if we do then they should have the proposed name. The current name means writers in the country of Croatia that were previously from the country of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Place Clichy (talk) 15:08, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is exactly the meaning such naming could imply, and in that sense both name and categorization are absolutely unnecessary - we don't use such categorization. There are lots of writers who lived and living in multiple countries during a lifetime - Bosnian-American writer Aleksandar Hemon is not categorized as American writer from Bosnia and Herzegovina. ౪ Santa ౪  99°  09:18, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment — withdrawing !vote — parent Category:Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina is "of", not "from"; several of the parent subcategories are "in" instead of "from" or "of". This needs more thought. Agree current name is wrong, so needs to change. But what are we actually categorizing here? Ethnicity? Language?
 * This is not about language because all people in Bosnia and Herzegovina are Serbo-Croatian speakers. Originally it is about religion (Islam, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox). Marcocapelle (talk) 08:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Also true. ౪ Santa ౪  99°  08:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, admittedly best course of action would be to remove any and all of the ethnicity based sub-cat under Writers of/from Bosnia-Herzegovina. This particular tree is and should be based on nation/country of origin, but I assume with clear-cut ethnic differentiation being Balkans' staple, these ethnicity-based could be re-created. On top of that, (un)fortunately, we have all three top cat Writers sub-categorization: Writers by ethnicity‎, Writers by nationality‎ and Writers by language. At the same time i was writing this nom, i was also (reluctantly) adding Serb Writers of Bosnia. and Bosnia. writers by ethnicity (Bosnia.=Bosnia and Herzegovina) (last being included into Writers by ethnicity). So, yes, Croat/Serb/Jewish/Romani writers of/from Bosnia. are based on ethnicity and now included into Bosnia. writers by ethnicity which is further included into Writers by ethnicity; we have Bosnia. writers which is based on nation/country and is included into Writers by nationality. (Separately we have per language cats Croatian-language writers‎, Romani-language writers, but we generally lack both Bosnian- and Serbian-language writers (I am especially surprised with a lack of Serbian-language writers although I know why - not even language beats ethno-national identity preference among editors)). ౪ Santa ౪  99°  08:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  23:32, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete and use as precedent for others — admittedly best course of action would be to remove any and all of the ethnicity based sub-cat.
 * This seems to be an ethnicity by inference category masquerading as a cross-nationality category.
 * Looking at Ivica Đikić again, he was born in a town that is now in B&H, but did all his journalistic work in Croatia. His other categories are all Croatian.
 * Looking at others, they seem to be "Croatian" based upon study in Zagreb, no matter their actual heritage or religion or residence.
 * Željko Ivanković seems to be a denier that there is any significant difference between Bosniak, Croatian, Montengrin, and Serbian language. His stub article isn't clear on self-identifying as Croat.
 * WP:COP-HERITAGE should not be used to record people based on deduction, inference, residence, surname, nor any partial derivation from one or more ancestors.
 * William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:07, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Merge to Category:Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina writers, as indeed a trivial intersection between ethnicity and occupation. And purge Ivica Đikić at least from the latter target. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:46, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Category:Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina writers. This ethnic-based intersection with an occupation is not needed. Place Clichy (talk) 22:12, 6 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:Serbian Romani writers

 * 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 to Category:Serbian Romani people and Category:Serbian writers. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  12:28, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Serbian Romani writers to Category:Romani Serbian writers
 * Nominator's rationale: Naming consistency within a group of "ethnicity-foo" cats. I made an error in sequence while creating it. ౪ Santa ౪  99°  10:25, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 20:32, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * withdrawn Speedy rename by author WP:C2E.
 * Support, the articles are already in Category:Serbian Romani people and Category:Romani writers so no further merging is required. I guess the same should happen with Category:Romani Bosnian writers. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:49, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I had mistaken this for a WP:SMALLCAT nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:43, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 19:02, 27 January 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 15:07, 28 January 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  23:29, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * are you sure your argument is not in favour of a merge in the reverse direction, as for Category:Serbian Romani people? Place Clichy (talk) 14:54, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Good point, . Category:Romani people by country is all  Romani people. are all these to be reversed?
 * Indeed, I believe it is which should be renamed to . Place Clichy (talk) 18:56, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Problem at Category:Romani by country. Some are (Romani Americans, Romani Mexicans), just like African Americans. But most are "Romani in ". Swap all the people to Romani for consistency?
 * Wow, I did not notice this. I actually followed Jewish-Foo pattern here, so I am now little bit confused, and not sure what should be right course of action? ౪ Santa ౪  99°  20:04, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * And I am thinking, @William Allen Simpson is maybe closest to correct reasoning, and pattern that should be followed? ౪ Santa ౪  99°  20:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The Fooian Barian format has always been problematic, because of its inherent ambiguity (although I don't think there is ambiguity in the case of Serbian & Bosnian Romani). This pattern is just not used with the same understanding in the New World, especially all the Fooian Americans, and in the Old World. Maybe Romani writers from Serbia, or Serbian writers of Romani descent? I would tend to favour Romani writers from Serbia as these writers actually consider themselves Romani, not just to have descent. But then again, I don't have an issue with Serbian Romani writers or Bosnian Romani writers, per parent Category:Serbian Romani people. Place Clichy (talk) 09:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Unlike on the issue of Croatian vs Croat writers of Bosnia and Herzegovina, here I am completely ambivalent (too) - I simply followed Jewish-Foo writers pattern. However, I now understand this entire scope needs better harmonization in whatever direction. ౪ Santa ౪  99°  09:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment — nominator notes that this follows the Jewish-fooian pattern. But it is missing the clarifying hyphen. Agreed that Jewish is a good analogue, as these are a native (Indian subcontinent) diaspora. Matches Category:Jewish writers by nationality, all "Jewish Fooian" with few exceptions (only under Category:British Jewish writers, because Brits consider themselves special). These are WP:OCEGRS distinct and unique writers.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:04, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Category:Serbian Romani people and Category:Serbian writers, trivial intersection between ethnicity and occupation, WP:OCEGRS, same as discussion above. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:53, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Category:Serbian Romani people and Category:Serbian writers. This ethnic-based intersection with an occupation is not needed. Place Clichy (talk) 22:13, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Category:Serbian Romani people and Category:Serbian writers — given the nominator's expressed ambivalence, I've withdrawn my earlier !vote, and now support merge.


 * 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:Rabbis from Prague
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 12%23Category:Rabbis from Prague

categories named after sports venues

 * 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: purge and delete SMALLCATs, and split Category:Wembley Stadium and Wembley Arena. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  17:48, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting boardwalk hall
 * Propose deleting camille chamoun sports city stadium
 * Propose deleting events at camille chamoun sports city stadium
 * Propose deleting croke park
 * Propose deleting fenway park
 * Propose deleting gaddafi stadium
 * Propose deleting melbourne cricket ground
 * Propose deleting millennium stadium
 * Propose deleting sam boyd stadium
 * Propose deleting shea stadium
 * Propose deleting soldier field
 * Propose deleting sydney cricket ground
 * Propose deleting t-mobile arena
 * Propose deleting thomas & mack center
 * Propose deleting wembley stadium and wembley arena
 * Propose deleting wrigley field
 * Propose deleting yankee stadium
 * Propose deleting yankee stadium (1923)
 * Nominator's rationale: These categories contradict WP:OCVENUE by categorizing events by venue. User:Namiba 16:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Selectively Purge, Keep Most (as creator of some): Namiba is correct that there is rampant WP:OCVENUE but many of these categories have 5+ legitimate articles like History of Wrigley Field, Home Run Apple and Millennium Stadium Charitable Trust. Here's my analysis of what the first three would look like if purged:
 * Boardwalk Hall: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 * Camille Chamoun: None. (The parent category isn't nominated but is also sparse).
 * Croke Park: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 * No objection to deleting any left with less than 5 articles but an across the board delete would throw the baby out with the bath water. - RevelationDirect (talk) 19:22, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep all. The clause of WP:OCVENUE invoked here is poorly reasoned, was added without discussion, and should be removed. For an article about an event, the location where the event occurred is a defining characteristic, and it does not lead to over-categorization, because an event only has one location. For example, we have Category:Events in New York City, which nobody would suggest is over-categorization, and Category:Yankee Stadium has the same purpose. OCVENUE only says that we shouldn't have these categories because some of them will have too many articles to be "readable", but that is not a reason for a category not to exist; by that argument, we should delete Category:People because it has too many articles. Toohool (talk) 22:11, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hogwash! It was not added without discussion. As originally proposed over multiple drafts on Talk in early 2007, it was For example, some very notable locations (e.g. Madison Square Garden) have hosted many sports events and conventions over time; categories for all of these events would not be manageable. That language has been updated after dozens of discussions here.


 * If there is consensus for these to be kept, the I propose that Category:Wembley Stadium and Wembley Arena be split. They are two separate, and different types of, venues that just happen to be nearby each other. Thryduulf (talk) 11:47, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed, support the split if kept. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:22, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:06, 24 January 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 08:34, 26 January 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  22:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep all unless there is a better argument for deleting some. Agree with Toohool that OCVENUE is poorly reasoned - these categories hardly have too many articles to be readable - although I can't comment on how this was added.  In any case, many of these categories include articles that are not events and so OCVENUE, even if it was well reasoned, is not a valid argument for deleting these. Rlendog (talk) 17:03, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * (expanded below) Purge and delete — WP:OCVENUE has been affirmed by discussion some 72 times since 2015, including last year and already this year. Category:Events in New York City is about a human habitation (AKA Category:Populated places). After purging, there are some legitimate articles in Category:Yankee Stadium (1923) (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), plus 6 media files, so it could be kept.
 * Please be clear about OCVENUE. The main thrust of it is that we should not categorize venues by their events, hence why we don't have things like Category:WrestleMania venues. That is perfectly sensible and has been affirmed many times. There is one clause that was added to OCVENUE however that says the opposite, that we shouldn't categorize events by venue, which is the part that has no reasonable basis. Why is it fine to categorize an event by the "human habitation" where it occurred but not by the building where it occurred. If anything, the building is even more relevant than the city. If you watch the video of UFC 281, you are looking at the interior of Madison Square Garden the entire time, you're not looking at New York City. Toohool (talk) 22:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Enough with WP:ILIKEIT. WP:OCVENUE is reasonably clear. It is the culmination of nearly 20 years of practice, documented and updated by multiple decisions since February 2007. (It originally was called "Locations of specific events".) It should not be overturned because a few editors repeatedly violate consensus in hopes that it will be overturned. (Unlike the currently disreputable US Supreme Court.)
 * It's not ILIKEIT, it's an argument based on WP:DEFCAT, the fundamental criteria for existence of categories. The venue where an event occurs will typically be universally discussed in reliable sources, stated in the first sentence or two of the lede, and listed in the infobox. It doesn't get much more defining than that. The deletion argument here consists of nothing more than "because a guideline says so". Your history of the guideline in question is inaccurate, but I will take that to the guideline talk page instead of derailing this CfD further. Toohool (talk) 17:00, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

William Allen Simpson (talk) 22:53, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: My memory is fairly accurate. This wording has been there since the day it was added after multiple CfD followed by a month's discussion on the Talk page: Avoid categorizing events by the locations of the specific events, such as arenas that have hosted specific sports events or concerts, convention centers that have hosted specific conventions or meetings, or cities featured in specific television shows that film at multiple locations. For example, some very notable locations (e.g. Madison Square Garden) have hosted many sports events and conventions over time; categories for all of these events would not be manageable. [emphasis added] It has simply been split into separate paragraphs and copyedited for clarity.
 * This is not an accurate quote of the original language. Further discussion is underway at the guideline talk page. Toohool (talk) 21:45, 29 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Purge, then delete the WP:SMALLCATs. WP:OCVENUE is absolutely being applied correctly here, and I reject the idea that the venue is a defining characteristic for many events, especially for some of the pages in categories like Category:Wrigley Field, where some of the pages are series that took place at two venues. The other chief argument for keeping is basically "it's not that bad right now," which I think is a horrible precedent to set for when somebody DOES go and add these categories to every event that has ever happened at these venues. With that said, some of the categories do have enough non-event pages to justify being kept around, and I firmly do NOT support deleting those categories (although they should still be purged of the event pages) fuzzy510 (talk) 02:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Nobody is arguing "it's not that bad right now", the argument is that it's good, because venue is a defining characteristic for many events. If an event occurs at multiple locations, like a baseball series, then you have a WP:DEFCAT question regardless of whether you categorize by city or venue. 1929 World Series is already categorized in both Category:Sports competitions in Chicago and Category:Sports competitions in Philadelphia. Is that a rationale for deleting both of those categories? Toohool (talk) 21:45, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 21:30, 2 February 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:34, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep until all venues with at least five articles about non-events are filtered out. WP:OCVENUE doesn't necessarily apply to all of these categories. For example, has at least six articles which aren't events: Yankee Stadium, Macombs Dam Park, Monument Park (Yankee Stadium), New York Yankees Museum, Yankees–East 153rd Street station, 161st Street–Yankee Stadium station. A similar situation applies to  (which, however, should be split, as other users have mentioned above). – Epicgenius (talk) 17:36, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That's the same as Purge and delete, except that nobody would do the purge. So a waste of effort for everybody involved. This is the time for discussion.
 * Fair, in that case we should delete the SMALLCATs. I was merely objecting to the wholesale deletion of categories that had several non-events, like Yankee Stadium. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:50, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Understood. I'll modify my !vote to be more clear. It's become obvious that the events were obscuring the valid articles important for navigation. Nearly all of the eponcats will be kept.

William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:57, 3 February 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  23:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Selectively Purge, then Delete WP:SMALLCATs, Split Category:Wembley Stadium and Wembley Arena, Delete Category:Camille Chamoun Sports City Stadium (1 article) and sub-Category:Events at Camille Chamoun Sports City Stadium (only 5 events) — per RevelationDirect, Fuzzy510, Epicgenius — Given the many comments that events should be filtered out, I've spent some hours doing a partial purge. There are still some questionable articles. Should "perfect games" be left in the category? Should defunct teams be left in the category? Nearly all have enough articles to survive SMALLCAT, but folks should peruse them for others that should be purged. As already noted: Category:Camille Chamoun Sports City Stadium is a SMALLCAT EPONCAT on its own, and should be deleted (now tagged).
 *  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:Hush

 * 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  12:31, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting hush
 * Nominator's rationale: The current name is ambiguous. This contains Hush (2016 film), 2 foreign-language remakes, a TV spinoff and a character redirect. There is not enough content to rename as category:Works based on Hush (2016 film). I think deletion would be best. – Fayenatic  L ondon 21:35, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. No issues with recreation if more content is added, however in that case a rename is warranted. Kbdank71 03:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Per reasons given. Also worth mentioning it was created by an infamous socker.★Trekker (talk) 17:00, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per above -- Lenticel ( talk ) 12:15, 12 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:Greenlandic mayor 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: manual delete. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  12:32, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting greenlandic mayor stubs
 * Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated stub category, with no evidence of approval by WikiProject Stub sorting. While this is a legitimate and warranted stub template, every template does not always need to be paired with its own dedicated category -- a stub category only becomes warranted when the template is used on at least 60 articles, and much below that it should just sort pages into appropriate parents. And given Greenland's small population and small number of municipalities, there's no prospect of getting this up to 60 articles quickly either. So the template should just sort these four people into and, but it doesn't need its own dedicated category for just four people. Bearcat (talk) 16:26, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Kbdank71 16:50, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:43, 4 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:Lists related to philosophical movements

 * 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  12:32, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Lists related to philosophical movements to Category:Philosophy-related lists
 * Nominator's rationale: Merge, as it only contains List of philosophies and List of schools of philosophy. The first is already in Category:Philosophical theories, and the latter in Category:Philosophical schools and traditions, so no other merging is needed. – Fayenatic  L ondon 16:03, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. Kbdank71 16:51, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:45, 4 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
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 12%23Category:Rulers

Category:Tennis players playing touchtennis

 * 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  12:35, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting tennis players playing touchtennis
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT for just one person, on a characteristic that isn't clearly defining of that person's notability. We don't have any categories for touchtennis at all, categorizing it only as a form of tennis, so we don't have an established scheme of categories for touchtennis competitions and players and such for this to be a part of. And even if somebody with a lot more knowledge of the topic could populate it enough to get it over the SMALLCAT hump, it would still have to be renamed to something more consistent with Wikipedia's category naming rules. Bearcat (talk) 15:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per SMALLCAT Kbdank71 17:46, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, not defining for the single article in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:47, 4 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:Theseus Agria F.C. players
<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  12:35, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting theseus agria f.c. players
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT for just one person. As always, every sports team that exists does not automatically get one of these the moment one former player for that team goes on to become notable enough for a Wikipedia article -- this would be fine if there were five or six or ten notable former players for Theseus Agria, but is not needed for just one person. Bearcat (talk) 15:11, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom Kbdank71 17:43, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:48, 4 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:Megas Alexandros Irakleia F.C. players
<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  12:35, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting megas alexandros irakleia f.c. players
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT for just one person. As always, every sports team that exists does not automatically get one of these the moment one former player for that team goes on to become notable enough for a Wikipedia article -- this would be fine if there were five or six or ten notable former players for Megas Alexandros Irakleia, but is not needed for just one person. Bearcat (talk) 15:11, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom Kbdank71 17:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:49, 4 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:Pontioi Katerini F.C. players
<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  12:36, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting pontioi katerini f.c. players
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT for just one person. As always, every sports team that exists does not automatically get one of these the moment one former player for that team goes on to become notable enough for a Wikipedia article -- this would be fine if there were five or six or ten notable former players for Pontioi Katerini, but is not needed for just one person. Bearcat (talk) 15:07, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom Kbdank71 17:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:49, 4 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:Wikipedians against LLMs
<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: speedy deleted. G7 requested by creator (non-admin closure) —Alalch E. 19:16, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting wikipedians against llms
 * Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:USERCAT for lacking any discernible collaborative function - this is not an area where people forming factions is at all helpful, and would merely serve to inflame passions. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 14:48, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Knowing the present context, this would appear to belong to Category:Wikipedians by Wikipedia editing philosophy, but it's really a category that groups users by advocacy of a position, as described in WP:USERCATNO; the category name doesn't indicate that the opposition to LLMs is related to Wikipedia, i.e. that it is a statement of opinion on internal Wikipedia matters. So probably delete. But maybe rename? —Alalch E. 16:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:50, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete I tagged it for CSD under WP:G7 because I regret creating this and no longer see merit in its existence. But in case that's declined, making clear here as well that I support deletion. <small style="font-size:80%;">silvia  <small style="font-size:65%;">(BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4)  <small style="font-size:75%;">(inquire within)  18:57, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:G7. The creator has added a G7 tag to the article. Clyde!Franklin! 18:57, 4 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:Royal Brunei Air Force units
<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  12:36, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting royal brunei air force units
 * Nominator's rationale: The user created multiple redirects to Royal Brunei Air Force Base, Rimba sections, then created this category to categorize those redirects. The category contains section redirects pertaining to a single article. —Alalch E. 13:51, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Category:Air force units and formations by country contains NUMEROUS subcategories of identical subjects, many of those contain redirects to similar articles.  Secondly, a Wing is a major formation of an air force, and the notability of articles (and / or redirects) as LONG since been established!  Militum professio scriniarii (talk) 13:58, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The category just duplicates the article. It doesn't serve any purpose. This has nothing to do with notability. —Alalch E. 14:05, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete. Unnecessary categorization of several redirects to sections of the same article.  Does nothing to help with navigation.  Kbdank71 16:55, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, creator apparently does not understand the purpose of categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:52, 4 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:Boxing matches by venue
<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: no consensus. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  17:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Boardwalk Hall to Category:Boxing matches in Atlantic City, New Jersey
 * Propose merging Category:Boxing matches at Madison Square Garden to Category:Boxing matches in New York City
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OCVENUE, there is no encyclopedic value to categorizing events by the venue in which they took place. User:Namiba 16:12, 18 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose (as creator of the Boardwalk cat): The risk with WP:OCVENUE is either that you'll create category clutter by either adding venues into many event categories (by say concert tours) or creating large categories that are hard to navigate by major venues (like Madison Square Garden). These categories avoid both problems:
 * Muhammad Ali vs. Joe Frazier II and Mike Tyson vs. Michael Spinks only occurred in one venue and the boxing match subcats avoids a sprawling category by venue. The locations is defining: many of the articles mention the venue in the lead/nearly all in infobox and the proposed merger just upmerges these into a larger parent category by location. - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:59, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * What do you think about OCVENUE specifically mentioning Madison Square Garden? It would seem to contradict your reasoning for circumventing the policy. "Many notable locations (e.g. Madison Square Garden) have hosted so many sports events and conventions over time that categories listing all such events would not be readable."--User:Namiba 19:48, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Are boxing matches held at Boardwalk Hall or Madison Square Garden defined by their location? Is a boxing match at the Barclays Center demonstrably different than one at Madison Square Garden? The ring, the fighters, the rules, the promotion, and presentation would all be precisely the same.--User:Namiba 19:54, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The theorized example in the guideline anticipates one category for all MSG events with too many entries to be navigable. The nominated boxing subcategory has 31 articles.
 * These are the preeminent boxing locations in each city: 35 of the 40 articles in AC are in one venue while 31 of the 38 in NYC are in one venue. (A Barclays Center subcat would fail WP:SMALLCAT.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:32, 19 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep per RevelationDirect and per my comments in the CfD above. The Madison Square Garden example exactly illustrates the silliness of this OCVENUE clause: We have Category:Madison Square Garden, the exact thing that OCVENUE says we shouldn't have, and it's fine! It's a little large (especially since someone added a ton of team season articles to it), but that can be handled by diffusion to more specific categories, such as the ones in this CfD. Toohool (talk) 22:17, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I see no difference here between these and Wrestlemania venues. Unless OCVENUE is changed, then these should be merged.--User:Namiba 02:12, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * You see no difference? They are exactly the opposite of each other. One leads to overcategorization. The other does not. The guideline does not need to be changed in order to make the right decision here; guidelines are descriptive, not prescriptive. Toohool (talk) 03:23, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 18:20, 24 January 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  22:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per RevelationDirect and Toohool. And if OCVENUE is generating CfDs like this then clearly it needs to be changed. Rlendog (talk) 03:06, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Support — unusually, RevelationDirect has the shoe on the wrong foot. It might be OK to have these in Category:World Boxing Association venues, but not vice versa.
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

William Allen Simpson (talk) 23:20, 28 January 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  10:42, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment — The venue where an event occurs is NEVER defining. Events can be held in different years at different locations. Recurring events are categorized by populated places, not buildings and structures. Single events may be notable, but are not defined by the location (or size) of the audience, auditorium, or stadium. Mere WP:OCTRIVIA. (The Ali and Tyson matches would be notable no matter had they been held in a small TV studio before a pay-per-view audience.)
 * There is discussion underway at the guideline talk page about whether the venue can be defining. Not sure why you're talking about recurring events in relation to categories that consist entirely of one-time events. OCTRIVIA can't reasonably be applied to fundamental data like the location or date of an event. By your reasoning, Mike Tyson vs. Michael Spinks would be notable no matter whether it was held in Atlantic City or Kansas City, so shouldn't we delete Category:Boxing matches in Atlantic City, New Jersey too? It would be just as notable whether it was held in 1988 or 1987, so shouldn't we delete Category:1988 in boxing? Toohool (talk) 22:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There's no actual discussion underway, mostly WP:WALLOFTEXT, already-discussed arguments, and WP:SARCASM (as above). There's no good reason to continue there (or here).
 * WP:DIFFUSE is by date.
 * WP:CATDEFINING is geographic location of a place: state, province, populated place.
 * WP:NONDEFINING says, "if the characteristic falls within any of the forms of overcategorization mentioned on this page, it is probably not defining."
 * WP:OCVENUE (overcategorization section Venues by event) says, "Likewise, avoid categorizing events by their hosting locations...." Venues are "buildings and structures", not geographic locations.
 * William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:23, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Support per William Allen Simpson above. The venue is not defining. The example given above, Mike Tyson vs. Michael Spinks, actually shows this very well.  A fight between two undefeated heavyweight champs is notable regardless of where it was held.  Kbdank71 16:48, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The guideline's concern is with categories be too large to navigate. This moves the articles into still larger parent catogories by city and doesn't remove the location at all. - RevelationDirect (talk) 17:00, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The guideline does not say anything about size. It states "There is no encyclopedic value in categorizing locations by the events or event types that have been held there."--User:Namiba 23:23, 7 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:Roman-era historians
<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.

William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:07, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The result of the discussion was: rename as nominated and reparent. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:01, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Roman-era historians to Category:Ancient Roman historians
 * Nominator's rationale: Re-parent, removing Category:People from the Roman Empire and Category:History of the Roman Empire to match current contents.
 * Propose renaming Category:Roman-era Greek historians to Category:Greek-language historians from the Roman Empire
 * Nominator's rationale: Re-parent. These are explicitly limited to "Greek historians who lived during the era of the Roman Empire (27 BC - 1453 AD)."

William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 06:02, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * For the first: alt Category:Ancient Roman historians, some of them were from the republican era. Also, aligning with parent Category:Ancient Roman writers. For the second, I am not sure what the issue is with Category:Roman-era Greek historians, I suppose this can be kept as is. Thirdly, I am very puzzled by the existence of subCategory:Latin historians. Didn't nearly all ancient Romans write in Latin? So what does this add? Marcocapelle (talk) 16:00, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Absolutely none of them should be from the republican period, the parent categories are specifically Roman Empire. Anything earlier is an editor's mistake. During the hellenistic-era, they mostly wrote in Greek. That's why it's called "hellenistic". Even during Roman Empire, many still writing in Greek. We really really really need to stop categorizing by era, it just makes a mess.
 * Modified nomination accordingly.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  22:26, 26 January 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  10:41, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * If Category:Roman-era Greek historians is to be renamed then rather to Category:Historians from Greece in the Roman era per Greece in the Roman era and Category:Greece in the Roman era. Note that quite a few articles in the category are about BC people and that is perfectly fine. The header on the category page should be removed. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:59, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * We should categorize people's occupations by nationality. While I'm tired of fighting triple and quadruple intersection, either name this existing language restricted occupation by nationality, and purge the rest — or delete it.
 * Editors are either ignorant, or doing original research that contradicts centuries of classical studies, intellectual history, and more general education.
 * Looking at the 3 main sub-categories, they aren't "Greek" or "from Greece" (Roman Bithynia, Syria Palaestina, and Jerusalem). They wrote in the Greek-language, and adopted Greek-language sobriquets (according to their articles).
 * As far as the other contents, the restriction is only 2 years old. Either didn't purge the content to match the restriction at that time, or more recent editors have ignored it. Maybe editors are using categorization software that doesn't show the explicit restriction text.
 * We really really really need to stop categorizing by era, it just makes a mess.
 * William Allen Simpson (talk) 15:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * You are actually right that many articles in this category are about Greek-language people rather than people from the Greek homeland. So we can either rename to Category:Historians from Greece in the Roman era and purge people not from the Greek homeland, or not purge anything and rename to Category:Ancient Roman Greek-language historians (without Empire). Not sure which is the best. In the latter case the parent Category:Roman-era Greeks should also be discussed. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:56, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Almost all of them aren't from Greece, in fact. I think Category:Historians from Greece in the Roman era would be close to SMALLCAT. Category:Ancient Roman Greek-language historians is ambiguous - does it mean "Ancient Romans who wrote history in Greek" (e.g. Cato the Elder, Quintus Fabius Pictor, and excluding all non-Romans), or "Greek-language historians who wrote about ancient Rome" (e.g. including Appian, Plutarch). Either of these is quite different from the current category, since it would exclude figures like Memnon of Heraclea, who was not Roman and did not write about Rome, but did live in the Roman empire. Furius (talk) 23:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair points. Then maybe "era" isn't that bad after all: Category:Greek-language historians in the Roman era. (About era, I wouldn't change Category:Greece in the Roman era either.) Marcocapelle (talk) 07:48, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Era is still bad.
 * When the definition of Roman-era matched what students were taught 50 years ago (end of Hellenistic-era in 31 BCE began the Roman-era), that made some basic sense.
 * But editors grab anything from Greece after Macedonia conquest by Rome in 146 BCE as "Greece in the Roman era". Nope, not yet Roman-era, still Hellenistic.
 * So we get categories full of people from anytime anywhere somehow related to Romans.
 * Roman Republic and Roman Empire have very specific places and dates.
 * Roman-era is neither a nationality nor a country. Nebulous just doesn't work for categories.
 * William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:47, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It is not people "from anytime anywhere somehow related to Romans" but rather people from Roman-occupied lands i.e. from Roman provinces. That is very clearly defined. I think "Roman era" captures this concept well enough but I am open to a better phrasing. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * How about "of the Roman Imperial period" rather than "in the Roman era"? As William Allen Simpson says, that has a more precise meaning (though a little fuzzy at the late antique end). Furius (talk) 23:37, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Period or era would not make much difference. I oppose adding Empire or Imperial. That would exclude people in BC centuries who just as well lived in Rome or in Roman provinces. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:20, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Is that such a problem? The most significant example of that is Diodorus Siculus, who is generally treated as a "Hellenistic historian", E.G. by the Oxford classical dictionary Furius (talk) 16:34, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:54, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * As I meanwhile agree with changing "Greek" to "Greek-language", it is important to note that I prefer Category:Greek-language historians from the Roman Empire as nominated over doing nothing. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:22, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Despite 2 relistings, it seems just you and me and Furius (who didn't state a position).


 * 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:Books about anthropomorphism
<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  12:38, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting books about anthropomorphism
 * Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. No need to merge, the subcategory is already in the right trees. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:36, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 14:48, 4 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:Buildings and structures by association
<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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  12:38, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Buildings and structures by association to Category:Buildings and structures by family
 * Propose renaming Category:Buildings and structures in Denmark by association to Category:Buildings and structures in Denmark by family
 * Nominator's rationale: rename per WP:OCASSOC, vague "by association" categories are to be avoided. Move Category:Buildings and structures associated with the Dutch East India Company up to Category:Buildings and structures. Move Category:Buildings in Denmark associated with Hans Christian Andersen up to Category:Buildings and structures in Denmark. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:14, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support No functional change but maybe it will discourage future deviation from the policy. - RevelationDirect (talk) 21:21, 7 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:Baroque architecture in the Ottoman Empire
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 12%23Category:Baroque architecture in the Ottoman Empire

Category:Hindu temples in Tezpur
<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  12:39, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Hindu temples in Tezpur to Category:Hindu temples in Assam and Category:Tezpur
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT for just one entry. This would be fine if there were five or six temples to file here, but it doesn't aid navigation to obsessively subcategorize everything down to microcategories of one. Bearcat (talk) 05:12, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:05, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support, while there are in fact two more articles that could be put in this category, a category of three is still very small. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:34, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support


 * 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:Patna Medical College Hospital alumni
<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  12:40, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting patna medical college hospital alumni
 * Propose deleting britain’s top doctor
 * Propose deleting ophthalmic anaesthetist
 * Propose deleting elderly anaesthesia
 * Propose deleting bihar national college alumni
 * Propose deleting khoo teck puat hospital doctor
 * Propose deleting fellow of royal college of anaesthetists london


 * Nominator's rationale: Cluster of misconceived WP:SMALLCATs, all recently created solely to contain the same single person for what appear to be advertorialized purposes. Firstly, every educational institution does not automatically get an alumni category the moment it has one alumnus with a Wikipedia article, so Patna Medical College and Bihar National College are non-starters. Secondly, every organization that exists does not automatically get a "fellows" or "staff" category the moment one person associated with it has an article, so Royal College of Anaesthetists and Khoo Teck Puat Hospital aren't on either. Thirdly, Wikipedia does not categorize people for inclusion in other publications' copyrighted "top x" listicles, so Britain's Top Doctor is a no-no. Fourthly, the opthalmic and elderly anesthesia categories seem to just be "keywording" categories meant for search engine optimization rather than classification. Bearcat (talk) 04:55, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete, creator has apparently misunderstood the purpose of categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:37, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment Just a notice that Category:Bihar National College alumni, Category:Khoo Teck Puat Hospital Doctor and Category:Patna Medical College Hospital alumni categories have been emptied. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 02:15, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SMALLCAT -- Lenticel ( talk ) 10:23, 11 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:Female models born in 1960s
<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  12:41, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting female models born in 1960s
 * Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization by trivial intersection of characteristics. Wikipedia does not categorize people for the intersection of their occupation with their decade of birth, as those two facts don't have any defining relationship with each other. Bearcat (talk) 04:50, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:05, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:39, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete
 * Delete per nom -- Lenticel ( talk ) 12:15, 12 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:Placenames in the United Kingdom consisting of four words
<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  12:42, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting placenames in the united kingdom consisting of four words
 * Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization by WP:SHAREDNAME. The number of words in a place's name is not a defining characteristic of the place. Bearcat (talk) 04:48, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:40, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Obviously as the creator of this category I felt it was worthy of including on Wikipedia. Placenames consisting of four words are a curiosity in the United Kingdom (that do not occur in the Rep of Ireland for example) and came about a result of Great Britain's various cultural influences over the centuries. The number of words in a place's name is not a defining characteristic of the place, yes, but it is a defining characteristic of the wider cultural context of the landmass on which they exist. Could you think of a better Category name for such a concept so that the placenames I have collected aren't lost if/when you decide to delete this category? Regards. Ridiculopathy (talk) 13:09, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * "Defining characteristic of the wider cultural context of the landmass on which they exist" is not a basis for a category under our categorization rules. You admit that it's not a defining characteristic of the place — but being a defining characteristic of the place is the test that a category for the places has to meet in order to be allowed to exist. A better idea for a concept like this, if you think it's important, is a list, in articlespace rather than categoryspace, which can cite sources to demonstrate that other people agree with you about its importance. Bearcat (talk) 13:50, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, thanks for the explanation. Ridiculopathy (talk) 19:17, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. –Aidan721 (talk) 14:36, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. Overcategorization. Kbdank71 16:58, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and it is overcategorization. --Bduke (talk) 03:07, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:TRIVIALCAT.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 18:07, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a direct violation of WP:ARBITRARYCAT and goes against the concept of categorizing things based on their naming in WP:SHAREDNAME. - RevelationDirect (talk) 21:23, 7 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:New Orleans Breakers stadiums
<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  12:42, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting new orleans breakers stadiums
 * Propose deleting boston breakers (usfl) stadiums


 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. The team no longer exists and only played in one stadium during its existence. User:Namiba 03:22, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Even if you're counting the most recent incarnation of the New Orleans Breakers (2022), that's only two stadiums total.  WP:SMALLCAT applies.  Kbdank71 03:51, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, it is also not a defining characteristic of a multi-purpose stadium. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:42, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Adding as it also has only 1 entry and no longer exists.--User:Namiba 13:32, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support that one too. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:57, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete If these were purpose built stadiums, it would be one thing. Even if WP:SMALLCAT wasn't an issue (and it is), this association is non-defining. - RevelationDirect (talk) 17:50, 7 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:Religious civilizations
<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  12:42, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting religious civilizations
 * Nominator's rationale: I'm skeptical about the scope, and/or definition, of this new category. Arguably every human civilization has developed some form of religion at some point, and no religion grew up outside the realm of civilization. Place Clichy (talk) 02:46, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Very broad category that could encompass every civilization.  Kbdank71 03:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, plus it reduces all members of a given civilisation to the adherence to a particular religion by the majority of that civilisation (as no society is ever religiously homogeneous, and there are always irreligious members), so it is a massive generalisation. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:43, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Isn't the modern Western world based in Christianity? Does that make it religious? –<b style="color:#77b">Laundry</b><b style="color:#fb0">Pizza</b><b style="color:#b00">03</b> ( d c̄ ) 18:38, 7 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:Platonic deities
<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  12:43, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting platonic deities
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, no chance of growth &#32;- car chasm (talk) 02:28, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Place Clichy (talk) 03:05, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Kbdank71 03:39, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:46, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom -- Lenticel ( talk ) 12:16, 12 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:Heydar Latifiyan
<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  12:43, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting heydar latifiyan
 * Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category for a person without the volume of spinoff content needed to warrant an eponymous category. Apart from the eponym itself, the only other thing here is a military campaign that he was a participant in -- but he wasn't the central figure of that military campaign, so it isn't defined by his participation to a greater degree than it would have been by the participation of a few dozen other people named in its article who don't have dedicated eponymous categories on it. He's a subtopic of the event, not vice versa. Bearcat (talk) 00:14, 4 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and WP:OCEPON Kbdank71 01:05, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and WP:OCEPON. If we start adding articles about military campaigns (esp. WWI) to categories about people who have fought in them, there will be no end to it. Hopefully, wiki links provide precisely the type of connection that fits this purpose. Place Clichy (talk) 03:04, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, creator has apparently misunderstood the purpose of categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:47, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per above -- Lenticel ( talk ) 12:17, 12 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.