Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 5

 &lt; March 4 March 6 &gt;

Category:Fictional male detectives

 * 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  18:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Fictional male detectives to Category:Fictional detectives
 * Propose merging Category:Fictional female detectives to Category:Fictional detectives added 6 March
 * Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:OCEGRS, trivial intersection between gender and occupation of fictional characters. Fictional male detectives is not a notable topic in its own right. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:57, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * What about Category:Fictional female detectives? Both should be merged or neither merged. I am inclined to not merge either. --Bduke (talk) 01:15, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I have added the sibling to the nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:20, 6 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose I don't see why a character's gender is nopt notable. It does nopt seem trivial to me. Dimadick (talk) 10:06, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Per WP:OCEGRS we avoid gendered categories. This is not a special case where it should be allowed. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Support both and purge—
 * Because they should be "women" and "men", but often that is not notable or defining.
 * Because many/most of them are not actually detectives, but are private investigators.
 * Because Precious Ramotswe of the The No. 1 Ladies' Detective Agency is correctly listed under Category:Fictional private investigators, even though Ladies and Detective are notable and defining.
 * Because Category:Hercule Poirot is also correctly listed under Category:Fictional private investigators.
 * William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:49, 6 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Support both. Trivial intersection to be avoided without good reason (i.e. a separate article on the topic).  Miss Marple will still be in Category:Female characters in literature so no information is being lost, just don't need every possible intersection with her other categories.  SnowFire (talk) 08:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support If retained, they should be renamed to "women" and "men" per William. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:38, 9 March 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:Detectives and criminal investigators

 * 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  18:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Detectives and criminal investigators to Category:Detectives
 * Nominator's rationale: rename per earlier discussion at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_February_21 and per main article Detective. Move content that does not belong in a detectives category to parent Category:People in law enforcement. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:35, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * pinging participants to previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:40, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 06:07, 6 March 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 06:56, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support There is a redundant use of synonyms in this title. Dimadick (talk) 21:41, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per consensus of previous CfD. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 22:55, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support WP:C2D and purge per consensus.
 * Support and move Category:Cultural depictions of detectives and criminal investigators to Category:Cultural depictions of detectives and move Category:Private detectives and investigators to Category:Private investigators.--AHI-3000 (talk) 19:44, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * We don't do spurious nominations like this. None were tagged. Need a separate nomination after this concludes.


 * 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:Virtue
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 13%23Category:Virtue

Category:Student religious organisations in Norway

 * The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


 * The result of the discussion was: merge all.  bibliomaniac  1  5  18:40, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Student religious organisations in Norway to Category:Student religious organizations, Category:Student organisations in Norway and Category:Religious organizations based in Norway
 * Propose merging Category:Student religious organisations in Switzerland to Category:Student religious organizations, Category:Student organisations in Switzerland and Category:Religious organisations based in Switzerland
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCATs with only 1 entry. Re-nominating after Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_February_23 where Estopedist listed these countries (using the other spelling) but did not tag the pages. – Fayenatic  L ondon 16:46, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Fayenatic london Thanks. I cannot understand why English specialists don't make a deal: we use always "organizations" or always "organisations". Such spelling discussions are really waste of time Estopedist1 (talk) 16:52, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. We had a huge discussion about the s/z spelling, but unfortunately it did not lead to consensus. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:32, 5 March 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:Literature of Kievan Rus

 * 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  18:20, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Literature of Kievan Rus to Category:Old East Slavic literature
 * Nominator's rationale: As noted at Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 4, it is a child of Category:East Slavic literature (currently proposed to be renamed Category:Old East Slavic literature), but a parent of Category:East Slavic manuscripts. Seems like a needless layer in between. Besides, Category:Literature of Kievan Rus is a WP:SMALLCAT that has almost exactly the same contents as Category:East Slavic manuscripts, and as a child of Category:Kievan Rus culture along with Category:Old East Slavic, which proposed as the new parent of Category:Old East Slavic literature, I think it serves no further special purpose as a separate category, and has no added value. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:33, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 15:09, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom, though Sermon on Law and Grace should be purged since it is in Old Church Slavonic. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:17, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support — The Rus' were nordic vikings and spoke an antecedent of swedish. These are slavic-language documents of their subjects. The word was the root of "slave" in nordic, germanic, and enventually English languages. Best not to confuse them here.
 * Comment I'm not happy that Tale of the Destruction of the Rus' Land only parents to Rus' via Category:Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus'. There should be a better way to get it into Kievan Rus' culture more directly. How can that happen if this nom proceeds? Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Category:Old East Slavic literature will be a child of Category:Kievan Rus culture, so don't worry. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 02:58, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment you're not in a position to keep that promise since it is dependent on the success of another nomination. There's a procedural problem here. Laurel Lodged (talk) 08:20, 10 March 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.

William Allen Simpson (talk) 01:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Nederlandse Leeuw, @Marcocapelle, @William Allen Simpson, I presume this nomination is 'rename', not merge? Also are there any responses to Laurel Lodged's comment above? — Qwerfjkl  talk  18:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * it is meant as merge to the category that is proposed to be renamed in Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_12, so Laurel Lodged has a fair point. You might better wait closing the discussion here until after that other discussion on the 12th has been closed. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, it was intended to be a merge into Category:Old East Slavic literature once Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_4 had resulted in Category:East Slavic literature being renamed Category:Old East Slavic literature, but that hasn't happened yet. It was relisted yesterday; so far, Marcocapelle agreed to all three proposals and nobody else has objected. But I concede the points of Laurel here and William over there that it wasn't practical for me to nom this cat for merging into a cat that doesn't exist yet, making this nom dependent on the success of the other nom. I should be more patient in the future. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 18:34, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * (after edit conflict) Yeah basically what Marcocapelle says. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 18:34, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Please wait. As others have replied and Laurel noted, this was paired with a previous nomination. It should never have been done separately. As I wrote then, such impatience may result in no consensus.
 * I'm relatively new to CfD, I hadn't foreseen this problem. In recent days I've begun making some notes on which categories to nom for CfD, CfR or CfM and in what order, to prevent dependence problems like this. Unlike with Category:Rulers, I'm also trying to work bottom-up rather than top-down now; it's a better way to set precedents for future noms. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:28, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I see that 20 March you closed Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_12 as Rename (as expected, thanks!). This morning JJMC89 bot III completed the move. Articles such as Tale of the Destruction of the Rus' Land have now also been moved from "Literature of Kievan Rus" to "East Slavic literature" to Category:Old East Slavic literature. So I guess we can close this CfM now? Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:19, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Nederlandse Leeuw, this CfD has already been closed. No further action is necessary. — Qwerfjkl  talk  16:29, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh I thought you would include this text here in the cyan box, but alright. Thanks again! Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:31, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians in Barbuda

 * 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  18:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting wikipedians in barbuda
 * Nominator's rationale: Redundant to Category:Wikipedians in Antigua and Barbuda, which contains only this category and the same user. Also has too few people to support a location category per precedent. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:12, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * This category is to be used for the “Wikipedians in Barbuda” user box. CROIX (talk) 18:16, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That would be Template:User Barbuda. It currently uses both user categories. – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:41, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Just remove the category assignment from the userbox script. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:35, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, as well as for the historical precedent of deleting these type of categories for places with a population of under 50,000. In this case there are less than 1,700 residents in Barbuda, so it is unlikely such a category could be used for collaboration. VegaDark (talk) 00:50, 7 March 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:Estonian surveyors and land managers

 * The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


 * The result of the discussion was: merge. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Estonian surveyors and land managers to Category:Estonian people and Category:Surveyors


 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. Estopedist1 (talk) 13:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge to Category:Surveyors only, the article is already in the tree of Category:Estonian politicians. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:13, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Politicians? Pelmeen10 (talk) 09:26, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes Herman Kask was also an Estonian politician and categorized as such, so a merge to Category:Estonian people is redundant. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:36, 6 March 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.

Academic staff in Canada, Central America and the Caribbean, Oceania and South America
<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. I can't imagine relisting this is going to bring about any clearer consensus, so I'm closing this as rename in line with previous discussions. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming
 * Category:Faculty by university or college in Canada to Category:Academic staff by university or college in Canada
 * Category: Faculty by art school in Canada to Category: Academic staff by art school in Canada
 * Category: École des beaux-arts de Montréal faculty to Category:Academic staff of the École des beaux-arts de Montréal
 * Category: Emily Carr University of Art and Design faculty to Category:Academic staff of the Emily Carr University of Art and Design
 * etcetera
 * The full list of nominated categories is on the talk page


 * Nominator's rationale: rename, this is follow-up on Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_January_3 and Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_January_29. Faculty is ambiguous: it may well refer to an organizational unit of a university rather than to people. On the other hand academic staff is entirely clear. So far Europe, Africa and Asia have been changed. I have now nominated all remaining countries except the United States. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:03, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * pinging contributors to previous January 3 discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:24, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 12:05, 5 March 2023 (UTC) William Allen Simpson (talk) 06:55, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per precedent.
 * Support per precedent. That's an impressive amount of work! Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:08, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The WP:ENGVAR-violating expansion of British English to our worldwide academic categories now expands to North America. Per the precedent at previous discussions, there is no attempt to survey what the universities in these places actually call their professors. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:23, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Wondered why this "British English" falsehood is repeated, even after being debunked. UC Irvine, where is a professor of computer science, uses:
 * "Faculty and staff" for engineering;
 * "Academic staff" for humanities;
 * "Academic personnel" for the Provost and others who run the university.
 * Is this the source of irrational argument: the STEM-humanities culture war? The "globalists" (Doctors of Arts) use "Academic staff", and the administration (also PhDs) who hire professors, pay salaries, and govern departments are "Academic personnel".
 * William Allen Simpson (talk) 13:36, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Humanities at UCI uses faculty: Faculty. So does UCI in general: faculty.uci.edu. Not that this is at all relevant to this discussion. Oculi (talk) 15:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * As the links show, the use of "faculty" is a cascading tab under either "Faculty and staff" or "Academic staff", demonstrating use of the word "staff" at the institution. Faculty is not the issue. The assertion was that "academic staff" was somehow forcing "British English" upon us. To the contrary, this is widespread outside Britain as well.


 * Oppose as too broad a nom -- European categories and those for former colonies have been renamed to reflect local usage (including cognate terms in French and Swedish). Any change needs to be dealt with on a country by country basis, with evidence of local usage.  I suspect that Quebec will follow French usage, but what the rest of Canada (English-speaking) does requires evidence of local usage.  Furthermore the list cited relates to Africa and Asia, not Oceania or South America (where the usage probably reflects that in Spain and Portugal, from which they were colonised.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:21, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Apologies, this was a copy-paste error. The link now directs to the intended list with Canada, Central America and the Caribbean, Oceania and South America. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:40, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 06:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support - As per arguments I already expressed in earlier discussions - in short, faculty is like fakultet for Electroengineering and computer sciences, a distinct school under an university in many parts of the world and certainly in every Slavic language.-- ౪ Santa ౪ 99°  20:30, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. Per arguments in other discussions, this provides WP:COMMONALITY, with "Academic staff" being more internationally comprehensible than either the British English "Academics" or the American English "Faculty". My only reservation was about extending this to Canada: Looking at a sample of Canadian universities, it appears that usage of "faculty" is split between British usage (University of Victoria; McGill University; University of British Columbia; University of Alberta) and US usage (University of Toronto; McMaster University; University of Calgary; University of Manitoba). Had US usage of "faculty" been standard in Canada, this would have argued for this being established in Canadian English and thus provided a strong argument for keeping it. However, the use of "faculty" to refer to academic staff is not generally established across Canada and does not match usage in many universities, so adopting the more international "academic staff" for Canada would appear appropriate. Robminchin (talk) 23:38, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Peterkingiron please consider the information about Canada provided above ^ --Joy (talk) 17:30, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note also that in the link I posted below there's examples from Nipissing University (Ontario), University of Winnipeg (Manitoba), Carleton University (Ontario), University of Alberta (Alberta), University of Ottawa (Ontario), OCAD University (Ontario), University of Toronto (Ontario), Alberta College of Art and Design, and probably more (I gave up on the infinite scroll after a while). Only a few of these, by and large from the Toronto area yet not consistently among Toronto institutions, seem to be using this in a way that might potentially be confusing to some readers. Also there was a link to an Athabasca University (Alberta) document that gave a 404. A subsequent quick google search finds other examples of that usage there. --Joy (talk) 17:48, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Although "faculty" may well be the commonest term for academic staff in North America (unlike the rest of the world), it remains ambiguous and "academic staff" is fully understood and unambiguous. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support for exactly the same reasons as Necrothesp, and for consistency across the project. <b style="color:#98F">W</b><b style="color:#97E">a</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  12:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll repost one bit from before - I came across https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/academic-staff which seems to be useful for an overview of formal English usage. There's examples there from Australia, India, UK, Zimbabwe, Jamaica, Kenya, Ethiopia, Canada, South Africa, Malaysia, Ireland and elsewhere, that indicate this terminology is common there. Hopefully, this is also a relevant indication of vernacular usage. I'm happy to see that Robminchin's analysis confirms that Canadian examples were not merely an exception. Unless someone can provide a new coherent rationale why we should keep the existing scheme, support. --Joy (talk) 17:28, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I did not participate in the earliest discussions but I found all of them deeply unconvincing, without investigating what the actual colleges used along with massive cherry-picking.  "Faculty" for professors is perfectly common internationally and is not some strange American-ism.  Further, while "ambiguousness" is cited, this ignores the fact that it introduces an entirely new ambiguity as has been pointed out before: "Faculty" means professors specifically, while "staff" is used more broadly to potentially mean anyone vaguely associated with the program, visiting professors, etc.  For example, from Joy's links above, UBC (which does indeed have a single reference to "faculty" more as an organization, but one perfectly in keeping with this being a terminology for the professors) has this listing which separates "Faculty" and "Staff" as two different things.  Here's University of Victoria, also listed as a "pro" British usage example, also separating out "faculty" and "staff" as not equivalent.  This separation is far more impactful and important than the harmless and unlikely confusion between "Faculty" as term for a department in general, so why are we trading one unlikely confusion for a potentially major ambiguity?  And I still don't see this addressed about whether these categories are intended to be a scope change to expand to "staff in general", or if it means "We're calling them Academic Staff, but we really mean just faculty."  (Also, I'm not seeing tons of support for a split-by-region, but I'd offer an extra-strong oppose on Canada if it matters just because the usage there is clearly similar to the US, based on Joy's links.)  SnowFire (talk) 08:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The problem is that if we find clear evidence that both the University of British Columbia and the University of Victoria use the term faculty for both organizational units and for people, then that cannot be used as an argument that we should keep using the term faculty to mean only one of these things in categorization. I don't see how it serves an average English reader well to push a categorization scheme that is so blatantly ambiguous. Granted, there could be some average English readers that will find the term 'academic staff' ambiguous as well because of the specific meaning found in parts of the US, but I think we need substantially more proof of their prevalence before prioritizing them over the others. --Joy (talk) 14:20, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Per the links given above, U Victoria & UBC (and many more, I'm sure) use the term "Faculty" to mean what it has traditionally meant on Wikipedia: that of professors. Ergo, this use of faculty is not an American-only usage.  This seems very straightforward and important to me: if it is good enough for the universities in question, what's the problem with mirroring that usage here?  And... the ambiguity I'm talking about is taking these Canadian universities on their own terms, not because of a "specific meaning found in parts of the US."  These Canadian universities offered as evidence for the move are evidence of the ambiguity I'm talking about in Canadian English: these universities have a section called "Faculty" for professors (just as Wikipedia categories currently do), and they have a category called "Staff" for something else.  I can see someone pro-move arguing that this ambiguity is less important than the ambiguity between departments and the professors meaning (which I disagree with), but to be clear, I am making my argument strictly on the sources given and on Canadian English usage.  The non-equivalence of "faculty" and "staff" clearly happens in Canadian English as well.  SnowFire (talk) 18:45, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you're ignoring the fact that they also use the term academic staff in the same meaning. Also, the proposal wouldn't make it so that we call 'faculty' just 'staff', but 'academic staff', which is again what they seem to do as well. --Joy (talk) 17:59, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * "Faculty" for professors is perfectly common internationally and is not some strange American-ism. I really don't think this is true. And your comment that "Faculty" means professors specifically also illustrates the international issues here, as the use of "professors" to mean academic staff in general as opposed to only the most senior rank of academic staff is also an Americanism. In Britain, for example, we have lecturers, senior lecturers, readers and professors. All are academic staff, all would be referred to as "professors" in an American university, but we only call the last category (the ones who actually are professors, or "full professors" in American parlance, and hold chairs, either personal or established) "professors". -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:32, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * In some of the earlier CFDs, I looked at some international colleges and found them using "faculty" in the American sense. Perhaps that usage is outweighed by other considerations, but I stand by my statement that this is not an America-only usage as can be seen from a random sampling of international colleges.
 * Suppose these categories are moved (as seems likely). Can you spell out what exactly should be in these "Academic staff" categories?  For example, if an otherwise notable person is given a position as a secretary or administrative assistant at a college, should they be in the "Academic Staff of XYZ University" category?  These move requests have never spelled out whether they really are a scope change or not as best I can tell.  (I will grant that if a scope change is really what's desired here, this will change the equation slightly, but if not, then what's the grounds for excluding such employees from "Academic Staff" when they are classed as such on official websites?  For all that these people generally aren't notable anyway, of course.)  SnowFire (talk) 18:45, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * While I am opposed to these needless changes (a vast amount of work for imperceptible gain), university staff would be either academic or non-academic. So faculty = academic staff, and staff = non-academic staff. So I don't perceive a scope change.<span id="Oculi:1678506234676:WikipediaFTTCLNCategories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_5" class="FTTCmt"> — Oculi (talk) 03:43, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * This discussion is about the specific regions listed. The practices of other regions are out of scope. Moreover, many notable people are associated their entire lives with a university, but are not "faculty" or a "professor". Professors, lecturers, researchers, and other professionals are all "academic staff". (Many secretaries are working on (or have) advanced degrees, so I'm happy to include any notable secretaries within the scope.) Don't duplicate endless layers of heirarchy and niche titles that subsume university personnel. As a personal note, I've been active at various universities over the years, as anybody who checked my name might notice. Never as faculty, but I've more "pubs" than most full professors.


 * 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:Depictions of people on film
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 13%23Category:Depictions of people on film

Category:British India emigrants to the United States
<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  18:31, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:British India emigrants to the United States to Category:Emigrants from British India to the United States
 * Nominator's rationale: These two categories seem to plainly be covering the same subject; no need to keep both. —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:54, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 06:43, 3 March 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  10:41, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Question: Both were created by - John, is there a reason both are needed, or was it just an error? Thanks! —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:55, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * See creator's explanation on my talk page (diff). Johnpacklambert sees no need for both categories and suggests that 'Emigrants from British India' is preferable over 'British India emigrants'. —Ganesha811 (talk) 18:39, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge both to Category:Indian emigrants to the United States. Both are WP:SMALLCAT. Overcategorization by temporary corporate raiders (the East India Company). Much of JLP work in categories is suspect, and there's some kind of restriction on futher work here. But subjects could identify in many ways, and often would not see a loyalty to the ruling polity is accurate. Let's not perpetuate the problem.
 * <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.


 * Merge As Nominated Clearly overlapping and, together, they get up to 5+ articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 11:47, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge preferably as nom or reverse merge. British India lasted nearly 200 years so that this is not merely temporary.  Category:Emigrants from British India has a lot of subcats (mostly small - but possibly needing populating).  All the people appear to be ethnic Indians.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:28, 5 March 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.

Works by gender
<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: split. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose splitting Category:Works about men to Category:Works about men and Category:Biographical works by subject and Category:Biographical works
 * Propose splitting Category:Books about men to Category:Books about men and Category:Biographies (books) by subject and Category:Biographies (books)
 * Propose splitting Category:Works about women to Category:Works about women and Category:Biographical works by subject and Category:Biographical works
 * Propose splitting Category:Books about women to Category:Books about women and Category:Biographies (books) by subject and Category:Biographies (books)
 * Nominator's rationale: split such that the categories by gender are clearly about the topic men and women, in line with the parent Category:Works by topic. Works and books about individual people belong in the (already existing) biographical categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:53, 23 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support. However, there are many categories on Wikipedia that focus on women, so perhaps there should be subcategories named something like Category:Works about individual women to seperate out the female subjects? MClay1 (talk) 13:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose, I see no need to only present works about individual men and women in mixed lists. – Fayenatic  L ondon 14:33, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Surely men do not need to be separated, per WP:OCEGRS. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:34, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 06:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  10:40, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support — these are topic categories, not biography categories.
 * <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 to solve the apparent confusion between topic category and individual people. Place Clichy (talk) 12:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:25, 9 March 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:Modeling in France
<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  18:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Modeling in France to Category:French fashion
 * Nominator's rationale: Unique category name ("Modeling in Foo"). Redudant in Wikipedia category system Estopedist1 (talk) 10:24, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:20, 5 March 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:Muslim politicians
<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.  bibliomaniac  1  5  18:48, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting muslim politicians
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:G4, WP:OCEGRS. Note that we do not yet have Category:Christian politicians, but previously deleted Category:Jewish politicians is back again, too.


 * Under Category:Politicians by political orientation. Muslim is not a political orientation.


 * 2021 re-creation after deletion:


 * 1) Categories for discussion/Log/2007 November 21
 * 2) Categories for discussion/Log/2019 August 4
 * William Allen Simpson (talk) 12:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  19:05, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I wonder if we could some day do something about Category:Jewish presidents, a category that finds a connection between the presidents of Israel, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Janet Jagan and, once, Lenin and Nicolas Sarkozy. Place Clichy (talk) 11:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment -- A person's religion is likely to be a significant factor in how they behave politically. However what we have here is a potchpotch, mixing together politicians from radical (explicitly Muslim, even Islamiscist, parties) and democratic politicians in US and UK, in countries where Islam is a minority religion.  Probably disperse and containerise.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:43, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Re 'significant factor': political behaviour is significantly influenced by social class, occupation, level of education, or the decade people were born in, probably at least as much as by people's religion. And we probably would not categorize by upper-class politicians, politicians with master's degrees or politicians born in the 1990s. Place Clichy (talk) 08:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment - its a good point about Category:Christian politicians. The category should probably be kept but I agree that it looks out of place. Moondragon21 (talk) 23:34, 21 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.


 * (already voted) Note that there is already a subCategory:Politicians of Islamic political parties which is more clearly about political orientation. For Muslims who aren't in that subcategory there is clearly an unrelated intersection between religion and occupation. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:14, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Inclined to keep as useful in practice. The nominator appears to be mistaken about being deleted in the past; it was discussed in 2006 and 2007 and kept both times. Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_August_29 ended with Delete, but the rest of the Jewish politicians hierarchy looks well populated. As we have, it's useful to be able to navigate between that and other justifiable categories such as . Apart from those, I would support sub-categorisation by country at least where Muslims are a minority, because there it is newsworthy, e.g. UK's first Muslim to lead a party. After that, containerise it and exclude sub-cats for Muslim-majority countries (deleted at the 2007 CFD linked above by the nominator), in a similar way to the exclusions at e.g. Category:English-language songs. – Fayenatic  L ondon 22:23, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * apart from American and British, this subcategorisation is going to lead to very tiny subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:05, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
 * There are 13 Dutch according to PetScan. Granted, currently only 1 person in each of Belgian, German, Norwegian and Swedish, 2 Canadian, 3 Finnish, and 5 Australian, but these have potential to grow. – Fayenatic  L ondon 12:24, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I do not know whether a Filipino category would be useful. The category intersection brings up members of parties there which are "influenced by Christian democracy and Islamic democracy." I suggest allowing such party categories to remain in Category:Politicians of Islamic political parties, but not building a Filipino Muslim category without further prior discussion. – Fayenatic  L ondon 12:24, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Even if (though) the US House of Representatives, or its media coverage, has the IMHO deplorable habit of sticking an infamy stamp on the forehead of its perceived minority members regardless of their actual political positions, I don't think this is either a general practice in the rest if the democratic world or a desirable defining factor for politicians categorization anyway. 20:46, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  10:17, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. WP:G4 and WP:OCEGRS are long-established policies that should be enforced. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:37, 3 March 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.


 * Comment (not changing vote to containerise) -- I would suggest that the first split should be to remove British Muslim and American Muslim politicians to their own categories and see what we have left. Politicians from Muslim majority countries will mostly be Muslims and should not need to be in this category, which should be limited (by a definition in a headnote) to countries where this is a minority religion, except cases like Muslim Brotherhood which is a Muslim party.  If there are few cases in continental Europe we can have a European category, with the UK one as a subcat.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:OCEGRS. Several people are included in this category without their religion being mentioned in their articles, probably on the basis on their name or their family origins in a Muslim country. I have removed a few the British politicians from this category, but while the category exists it may be an unending task. Verbcatcher (talk) 02:43, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per above.<span id="Qwerfjkl:1678739534714:WikipediaFTTCLNCategories_for_discussion/Log/2023_March_5" class="FTTCmt"> — Qwerfjkl  talk  20:32, 13 March 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:Country name changes
<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. If anyone is seeking to make a list, see Geographical renaming. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting country name changes
 * Nominator's rationale: Virtually random, trivial category. "Siam" is called "Thailand", "Persia" is "Iran", etc. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:59, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:57, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment It's not entirely unreasonable as a category, compare Category:City name changes, which is full of Lists of renamed cities in country X, e.g. List of Australian place names changed from German names. (I do have to say many Lists in it are unsourced). But I agree the current category is grouping items that aren't specific enough. What if we just listified it and put it in Category:Geographical renaming? Update: I've changed my mind to Merge, see below. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:17, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete for Now with no objection to recreation if separate articles specifically about the name changes ever show up. Categorizing whole nations by this is not defining. Listification suggested by Nederlandse Leeuw would also be good. - RevelationDirect (talk) 11:52, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Listify and delete per Nederlandse.
 * Delete, poorly defined category, there are no articles about countries changing their name ...yet. Sionk (talk) 13:59, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge into Category:City name changes (along with Category:Lists of former place names) and Rename to Category:Lists of renamed places. In addition, Merge Lists of renamed places into List of city name changes, but rename the latter "Lists of renamed places" (we should keep all the contents for which there is no separate article yet, and I strongly prefer the country structure of List of city name changes over the continent structure of Lists of renamed places for navigational reasons). Reason: 'places' is a convenient catch-all term that makes separate lists and categories for countries and cities (or other administrative units) unnecessary. Lists that have 'places' in the title often include country name changes as well, such as List of renamed places in Eswatini. All lists that currently only have 'cities' in their titles can remain unchanged until 'places' becomes more convenient for some reason. (I only just figured this out after taking a good look at related articles and categories, and this seems to me the most reasonable, sustainable and convenient solution). Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:04, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * PS: While we're at it, we could rename List of administrative division name changes to List of renamed administrative divisions according to the commonly established practice in Category:City name changes. Incidentally, I can't help but laugh that we're discussing renaming categories and lists about renaming. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:08, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * PPS: A lot of Lists of renamed places in Category:Geographical renaming can be moved into my proposed Category:Lists of renamed places as well. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:17, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * PPPS: If we decided to listify (which could still be done regardless of what we do with this category and the other categories and lists), I suggest we start with Geographical renaming. That should save us a whole lot of trouble! Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:57, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete as trivial, too many countries have changed name at least once in their history. Besides there is an element of ambiguity, a name change often happens when something else happens too, so is it still the same country after the name change? E.g. Dutch Republic, Kingdom of Holland and Netherlands. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:26, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment -- This needs to be properly populated or deleted, but preferably Listify and delete. I note that Upper Volta, Ghana, Zaire, and a host of others do not appear.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. This isn't comparable to — that category contains lists of cities that have undergone name changes, while this category just contains articles about countries themselves. So if we had several lists to file here, then this would be an appropriate category for those lists, but it's not useful or defining as actually constituted. Bearcat (talk) 15:12, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. It is fair to say that every single country probably changed name in the course of its history, as none was called the way they are now in, say, paleolithic times. Place Clichy (talk) 12:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-defining per Categorization. If somebody wants to make a list article then start with the long Geographical renaming, not the merely four countries in this category. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:15, 11 March 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:People associated with the United States Capitol
<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. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  18:39, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting people associated with the united states capitol
 * Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OCASSOC. If kept, rename to Category:Artists associated with the United States Capitol and re-parent to Category:Artists, as a more concrete association. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:11, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete Despite "association" being in the name, this feels more like WP:PERFCAT in practice. - RevelationDirect (talk) 11:50, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Rename and re-parent both (latter sub-category nominated) but keep parent Category:People associated with buildings and structures:
 * Propose renaming Category:People associated with the United States Capitol to Category:Artists of the United States Capitol
 * Propose renaming Category:Architects of the Capitol to Category:Architects of the United States Capitol
 * William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:54, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Support proposals of William Allen Simpson. The 4 people named have produced art to decorate the Capitol and should be moved to a new category.  Then merge to United States Capitol.  I agree it is like a PERFCAT, but the objection to these is that we get too many items; something what will probably not apply here.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:48, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * (as mominator) I am supporting the proposals of William Allen Simpson too. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:54, 5 March 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:People associated with Stonehenge
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 13%23Category:People associated with Stonehenge

Category:Estonian fishers
<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  18:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose merging Category:Estonian fishers to Category:Estonian people and Category:Fishers


 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category has only 1 entry. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:58, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:41, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge — and consider purging Category:Fishers, that is not what made them notable.
 * Merge to Category:Fishers only, the article is already in the tree of Category:People by parish in Estonia. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:32, 5 March 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:Sindhi-speaking countries and territories
<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  18:47, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting sindhi-speaking countries and territories
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. It essentially contains Sindh, again Sindh, and States of India by Sindhi speakers (which is about demographics, not official language status). The full list of countries is: Pakistan and India. That's it. That doesn't merit a category. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 03:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:45, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete


 * 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:Regions of Ukraine by language
<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  18:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting regions of ukraine by language
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, has only 2 items, both of which I have just nominated for also being a SMALLCAT with only 1 item.

William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:36, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Category:Languages of Ukraine, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. (+ Ah now I notice the two subcategories are nominated below.) Marcocapelle (talk) 07:48, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete — should be a combined nomination, as they are contingent.
 * Delete But I would like to see an article on minority languages in Ukraine. The Stalinist population transfers were immense. The residual native speakers, in lands that they occupied for centuries, makes to pathetic reading. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:35, 9 March 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:Raions of Ukraine by language
<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  18:47, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting raions of ukraine by language
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, has only 1 item. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:38, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:36, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Becomes empty if there is consensus for the nomination below. If that is not the case then merge to Category:Languages of Ukraine. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:53, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete — should be a combined nomination, as they are contingent.
 * Delete But I would like to see an article on minority languages in Ukraine. The Stalinist population transfers were immense. The residual native speakers, in lands that they occupied for centuries, makes to pathetic reading. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:36, 9 March 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:Hungarian-speaking raions of Ukraine
<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  18:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting hungarian-speaking raions of ukraine
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, has only 3 items. WP:ARBITRARYCAT, the Hungarian language has no official status in these raions or anywhere else in Ukraine, and is not spoken by a majority in any raion or other territory in Ukraine. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:35, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete but, with 76% Hungarians, I would suggest moving Berehove Raion to Category:Hungarian-speaking countries and territories. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:59, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I nominated Category:Countries and territories by language for renaming to Category:Countries and territories by official language for a variety of reasons yesterday, including the fact that demographics change constantly, and reliable sources are often hard to come by. In the case of Ukraine, it has held only one countrywide census in 2001, so what the current situation in Berehove Raion is 22 years later is anyone's guess. In its capital city Berehove, Hungarians only made up 48% in 2001, for example; and urbanisation and other factors tend to favour a country's official or primary language in a city and its surroundings over the course of decades. I think linguistic categorisation of countries and territories should only be based on official language status to avoid endless maintenance issues and reliable sources disputes. You might want to give that nomination a look; you made or were involved with similar nominations in the past several years. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 11:23, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete including Berehove Raion. We do not categorize Hamtramck, Michigan as Polish-speaking (in 1970 it was 90% Polish), or Oak Park, Michigan as Hebrew-speaking (so many that there is a locally famous park overpass allowing Orthodox to walk to temple on sabbath), or Russian-speaking, or Ukrainian-speaking (I grew up walking distance from both the Ukrainian and Polish cultural centers). Over time, people assimilate, children move for education or employment.
 * Agreed. Incidentally, I nominated Category:Countries and territories by language for renaming to Category:Countries and territories by official language for a variety of reasons yesterday, including constantly changing demographics and the need to focus on official language status instead; you might want to take a look at it. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete But I would like to see an article on minority languages in Ukraine. The Stalinist population transfers were immense. The residual native speakers, in lands that they occupied for centuries, makes to pathetic reading. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:36, 9 March 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:Russian-speaking regions of Ukraine
<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  18:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting russian-speaking regions of ukraine
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, has only one item. (Edit) It's the only region in Ukraine where Russian has co-official status; this number is not expected to grow, so this category is not expected to grow. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:29, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 00:36, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete — there are Russian speakers in every region of Unraine, legacy of the Russian Empire and the USSR, who also shot people in the streets for speaking Ukrainian. A few might now have a majority after Russian revanchists have ethnically cleansed them.
 * ....apart from the demographics, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea is the only region which has Russian as a co-official language. Given everything that is currently going on in that country, it is not expected that the Russian language will be granted official status in any other region of Ukraine within its internationally recognised sovereign territory in the foreseeable future. Thus we cannot expect this category to grow. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:52, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete Whatever the wisdom of categorizing by language in general, there's a maintenance issue with this one since there is active population displacement. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:54, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete for now per RD. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:37, 9 March 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:Multi-sailed windmills
<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 to Category:Windmills. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  20:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose Renaming Category:Multi-sailed windmills to Category:Windmills with more than four sails
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:CATNAME
 * When I saw this at the bottom of an article, I was baffled since I believe all intact windmills have more than 1 sail. But the category header explains the intent:
 * This category is for traditional windmills with more than four sails. It is not for Mediterranean windmills with jib sails.
 * The current category name just isn't clear enough to aid navigation. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:02, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose - Explanation - The majority of traditional windmills have four sails. Any windmill with more than four sails is a "multi-sailed windmill". The proposed rename is not an improvement, IMvHO. Mjroots (talk) 07:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Besides the category you created, this doesn't seem to be a common term though. We have no Multi-sailed windmill article that would have reliable off Wikipedia sources and ground this category without requiring an explanation. RevelationDirect (talk)
 * - there's plenty of book sources that use the term. Not sure that we need a separate article though. This can be covered adequately in the windmill article. I'll add something there in due course. Mjroots (talk) 11:56, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * When that happens, a section redirect can stand in for a main article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:03, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:18, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer to Delete the category and upmerge to Category:Windmills. The very brief mention of the term in the Windmill article is unsourced and a Google search of "multi-sail windmill" turns up very little. Seems to be a confusing neologism. Sionk (talk) 14:11, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Upmerge to Category:Windmills per Sionk.


 * 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:Wikipedia categories named after insurance companies
<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  20:30, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose Deleting Category:Wikipedia categories named after insurance companies
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:PROJCATS, WP:OVERLAPCAT, and an extension for WP:C2E, author's request
 * 10 years ago when I created this category, I hadn't closely read the editing guidelines and was basing my category work off of what I saw other editors doing. So, when I created Category:State Farm and Category:GEICO I also blindly created this one too. There was no intended purpose I had in mind.
 * While the real world behavior of insurance companies is quite controversial, I don't recall the Wikipedia categorization of insurance articles being contentious so I can't think of what administrative purpose is served here. And, besides, you can still find all these same categories under Category:Insurance companies.
 * While we're past the 6 month mark for speedy deletion at the author's request, I'd still like to clean up my mistake. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:02, 5 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Background There have been a number of CFD nominations for the "Wikipedia categories named after"... tree, most recently just last month. Tagging all participants to that last discussion, regardless of iVote: - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:06, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 00:30, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support with thanks for the ping — unless somebody shows any actual work using this category that cannot use Category:Insurance companies instead.
 * Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:43, 5 March 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.