Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 12

 &lt; September 11 September 13 &gt;

Category:Songs covered by Greta Van Fleet

 * 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 23:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting songs covered by greta van fleet
 * Nominator's rationale: Non-defining aspect of the songs in this category and not an established category scheme. If any of the songs have achieved any notability for the versions by this group, they can be merged into Category:Greta Van Fleet songs. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 21:08, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. Seems reasonable. Mason (talk) 02:37, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Absolutely delete as non-defining. Two of the three songs in there only have a single unsourced sentence on their cover anyway, and the third does not appear to be notable enough to justify as much coverage as it has. QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 19:42, 13 September 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:Divided regions

 * 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) C LYDE  TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 13:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting divided regions
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:OR. Main article was deleted in 2021 per WP:OR, see Articles for deletion/Divided region. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:42, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  15:20, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not sure how WP:ARBITRARYCAT or WP:SUBJECTIVECAT would apply here. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:45, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, if WP:OR is a sufficient argument, I could scrap the other two if you prefer. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:55, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Some purging would be helpful (not everything in this category are regions). Perhaps the purpose would become clearer when the category is renamed to Category:Transnational regions or Category:Border-crossing regions. But other than that I can't see too much wrong in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:06, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Main article was Deleted Articles for deletion/Divided region. That's what's wrong with it. NLeeuw (talk) 09:23, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The article as it was written had too many issues (not sourced, for one thing), and maybe it is not a notable topic at all, but that does not hinder divided regions to exist as such. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep I dont think WP:ARBITRARYCAT or WP:SUBJECTIVECAT applies here but i agree that some purging might be needed as per Narcocapelle Qwv (talk) 17:06, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I scrapped those. The problem is WP:OR. Main article Articles for deletion/Divided region was Deleted as WP:OR. People just forgot to delete the category as well. NLeeuw (talk) 09:25, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Aside from the lack of a main article that defines the topic, I do believe that WP:SUBJECTIVECAT applies, as it is by definition an ethnic POV. Please stop disputing other users' comments. –LaundryPizza03 ( d  c̄ ) 00:20, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Did I do that? Sorry if I did. Both participants indicated WP:ARBITRARYCAT or WP:SUBJECTIVECAT were irrelevant arguments, I agreed and scrapped those from my rationale, focusing on the Wp:OR argument which got its main page deleted. I don't think that's disputing other users' comments; rather, I am accepting their criticism, improving my nomination as a result, and telling them about it. Should I have done it differently? NLeeuw (talk) 08:18, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl  talk  20:36, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I think WP:OR does not apply either as far as categorization is concerned. Sources are usually clear on in which country or countries a region is located. If it concerns multiple countries and if it concerns a region (which is not always the case, as noted) then it qualifies. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:16, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per Leo'a arguments, and WP:BLOWUP may also apply. Besides the OR and subjective rationales, this category is just a mixture of too many different things: transnational cooperation areas or conurbations (Grand Genève, Detroit–Windsor...), places that share the same name but have never been united (The Dakotas, The Guianas, Guinea (region)...), content better (or already) found in children and  (New Guinea,, Virgin Islands, , ...), natural and cultural regions than span across internal or international borders (, Okanagan Country, Fertile Crescent, Gran Chaco, ...) and of course countries that have been divided by wars or some other form or geopolitical event (, , ...). Selection is weird and arbitrary: one of the probably most notable division in the lifetime of most of us, that of Germany, is not deemed worth of an entry, while both Vietnam and Category:Vietnam are. Normandy is found there, presumably because it "lost" the Channel Islands in 1204, but not Dauphiné, which similarly lost some of its territory in the 1713 Treaty of Utrecht (higher Val di Susa and Val Chisone). Moldavia is there, presumably because of the 1812 split between Moldavia (region of Romania) and present-day independent Moldova, but not Luxembourg, despite the 1839 split between the province of Luxembourg (Belgium) and independent Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg. Note that for instance nearly all Counties of the United Kingdom have been sliced somehow with subsequent local government redesigns, and the same can be said of all countries. My opinion in short: regions are so often divided among several political entities throughout history that this is not a defining characteristic for any region; however, specific articles about the partition events themselves, when they exist, are worth placing in e.g.  or Category:Territorial disputes. I also agree that a specific category could be created for cross-border areas that take the form of an organized cooperation such as Category:Eurodistricts or  though Category:Cross-border regions already exists. I am a little bit more sceptical about a category for Transborder agglomerations, as it would probably be hard to put a realistic limit to what should be or should not be put in such a category. Place Clichy (talk) 12:05, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * TLDR re my above comment: calling every former territory or subdivision that was subsequently reshaped a divided region is just too indiscriminate. Hence WP:BLOWITUP. Place Clichy (talk) 14:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per Place Clichy. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:52, 20 September 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:IMAX venues in the United States
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 23%23Category:IMAX venues in the United States

Category:Gangsters killed during the Castellammarese War

 * 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 23:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting gangsters killed during the castellammarese war
 * Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEF. User:Namiba 19:39, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's nondefining, but I suggest we upmerge in case anyone's been diffused from the parent category Category:Murdered American gangsters of Italian descent Mason (talk) 02:39, 13 September 2023 (UTC)


 * If not kept, just delete instead of merge. All articles are already in Category:Murdered American gangsters of Sicilian descent. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:43, 13 September 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:Political music albums

 * 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 * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 23:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting political music albums
 * Propose deleting political music albums by genre
 * Propose deleting political music albums by artist nationality
 * Propose deleting political music compilation albums
 * Propose deleting political music eps
 * Propose deleting live political music albums
 * Propose deleting political music video albums
 * Propose deleting political music albums by american artists
 * Propose deleting political music albums by brazilian artists
 * Propose deleting political music albums by british artists
 * Propose deleting political music albums by canadian artists
 * Propose deleting political music albums by chilean artists
 * Propose deleting political music albums by english artists
 * Propose deleting political music albums by german artists
 * Propose deleting political music albums by icelandic artists
 * Propose deleting political music albums by irish artists
 * Propose deleting political music albums by nigerian artists
 * Propose deleting political music albums by swedish artists
 * Nominator's rationale: The implication of this category tree's existence is that political music is a genre in some sense, or at least something equivalent to it. The problem is that that link redirects to music and politics, a page which only uses the former phrase three times and in the first instance says the "nature of that message can also be ambiguous". It goes on to explain the ambiguity, but never comes up with a definition anywhere close to a music genre/equivalent. Can we call something a defining characteristic of any subject when the characteristic itself is so loosely defined? We certainly couldn't make an article for political music without a stricter definition, and my understanding is we wouldn't have categories for characteristics that don't have articles explaining them. QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 16:28, 12 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Mild support, I have checked a number of articles in Category:Political music albums by American artists (only) and most albums are not defined by this characteristic. I suppose it is easier to assess for an individual song whether it is about politics than for a whole album. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 13 September 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:International Socialist Organisations
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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 * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 23:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:International Socialist Organisations to Category:International socialist organisations
 * Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary capitalization of common nouns. –Vipz (talk) 15:33, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. Could be speedied under c2a. Mason (talk) 02:41, 13 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:53, 13 September 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:Slaves
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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) C LYDE  TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 13:40, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Slaves to Category:Enslaved people
 * Nominator's rationale: Being a slave is neither a natural condition nor a choice. It is less demeaning to refer to someone as having been enslaved (something that was done to them), than as being a slave.

Applies to all child categories, similarly named. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Support but you need to tag and list every category to which you want this to apply.--User:Namiba 19:40, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. I also think its worth considering how to parent enslaved people, because some categories include "slaves" as an occupation (as in Fooian people by occupation, whereas others put it as a status: Fooian people by status. Mason (talk) Mason (talk) 22:29, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * You can use the  to tag the other categories Mason (talk) 22:38, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Support rename -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:26, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose, unnecessary verbose, per List of slaves, per WP:COMMONNAME, so three different reasons to oppose. Agree that being a slave is neither a natural condition nor a choice, but presumably Wikipedia readers already know that. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose, unnecessarily verbose. Nom's rationale ("neither a natural condition nor a choice") is not convincing. It is a condition, and defining, too. Also, children of slaves are not "enslaved" (i.e., not turned from non-slaves into slaves), they are born as slaves, i.e., that was their "natural" condition, especially in ancient times. - Altenmann >talk 06:54, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Being forced into slavery from birth does not make slavery a "natural" condition. Funcrunch (talk) 15:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Altenmann. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:46, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Enslaved is increasingly becoming the norm now for many people and organizations looking at the history of slavery. See The Underground Railroad Education Center, the The US National Park Service, and the US national archives.--User:Namiba 18:35, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The cited National Archives webpage (which is clearly the most authoritative of the three) says Do not remove all uses of slave; the term should be retained when used as a modifier related to economic systems. Clearly in the United States there was an economic system of slavery. And the term "slave" refers to the category of people within this system. - Altenmann >talk 20:21, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Your quoting is highly selective; and the extract you quote is preceded by "Enslaved person is the preferred term for an individual. Enslaved persons and enslaved people are preferred terms to refer to groups of people. Enslaved can be used as a modifier instead of slave before a person’s name, role, or profession, or the modifier slave can be removed and not replaced in that instance, especially if the description elsewhere provides context related to enslaved people or slavery..." It most certainly does not advocate using the word "slave" to refer to the category of people within the former US system. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:34, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Enslaved is also used at UK national archives, see " UNESCO also uses enslaved to discuss individuals. .--User:Namiba 16:31, 17 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Unnecessary PC. More specifically, using the word slave[s] does not imply that Wikipedia maintains that such persons were/are not people, were so by choice or by a natural condition, or that there is in general anything good or positive about slavery. Suggesting otherwise is disruptive (see e.g. WP:RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS). Place Clichy (talk) 14:32, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Support, per nomination. In response to the opposers, this proposal is simply to rename a category, not every mention of a person being referred to as a slave. I see no overreach or "WP:RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS" issues here. Funcrunch (talk) 15:50, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose as long as the mainspace article slavery refers to the people it applies to as slaves rather than enslaved people we should do the same in category namespace. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 23:52, 20 September 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:Philippine Heads of State and Government
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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 * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 23:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting philippine heads of state and government
 * Nominator's rationale: Redundant to Category:Heads of state of the Philippines and Category:Heads of government of the Philippines. HueMan1 (talk) 06:03, 12 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:03, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. We used to have a hierarchy of Category:Rulers for heads of state and heads of government; although I thought that was useful, there was consensus to dismantle (most of) it. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:49, 14 September 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:Mathematical prefixes
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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:Prefixes. (non-admin closure)  Qwerfjkl  talk  20:45, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose deleting mathematical prefixes
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:NARROWCAT; Category:Function_prefixes suffices. fgnievinski (talk) 05:04, 12 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge to Category:Prefixes in order to keep the subcategory in that tree. Note that the subcategory only contains redirects, it does not seem very helpful for navigation either. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:25, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * To the contrary, the subcategory is very helpful to people using the category system to find related information, like all function prefixes used in math. If a category contains articles or redirects has no relevance at all, the only thing that counts is that the titles of category members belong into the category (which is the case here). --Matthiaspaul (talk) 17:10, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * It does have relevance because categories are a navigational tool. If there is no article from which you can navigate to the category page there is little use in having the category in the first place. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, categories are a navigational tool, but for this to work an article's title is irrelevant, the only thing that is actually relevant is the existence of contents. Articles often discuss many (related) topics, therefore we have redirects from the alternative titles of an article and all its subtopics to the location where the contents resides at present. It happens quite often that the title of an article would not semantically belong into a particular category, but its redirects do. We then include the redirects into the category rather than the article itself. The category system is not a grouped index of article titles but of (semantically) grouped keywords (represented by articles or redirects), which point to the corresponding contents. If someone wants to look up functional prefixes, he will travel down the Prefixes category and expect some kind of subcategory in there listing all function prefixes. He would be confused to find an article "cofunction" in that category because cofunctions is a much broader topic more about functions than about a particular prefix. That's why we have a redirect for the "co" prefix and only include this in the Function prefix category. Likewise, the "cofunction" article may be included in a Functions category, where it would be also okay to list a function like "cosine", but where an entry about the "co" prefix keyword itself would be off-topic. The contents of an article can often be semantically grouped or categorized in many different ways in parallel, that's why we can have redirects in categories and also have categories containing only redirects. Removing the category would make it much more difficult for someone to find the relevant information navigating the category system, let alone to look up other function prefixes as well. Not every subcategory must have a master article listed in its header.
 * --Matthiaspaul (talk) 10:16, 15 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Category:Mathematical prefixes contains a single item, Category:Function prefixes. If I understand the proposal correctly, it is suggested to remove the "middleman" category and place Category:Function_prefixes directly into  Category:Prefixes. If so, I agree with this course of action. - Altenmann >talk 18:39, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was my intention, as OP. fgnievinski (talk) 06:39, 13 September 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.

The Two Sicilies
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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) C LYDE  TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 13:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Kingdom of the Two Sicilies people to Category:People from the Two Sicilies
 * Propose renaming Category:Royal consorts of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies to Category:Queens consort of the Two Sicilies
 * Propose renaming Category:Pretenders to the throne of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies to Category:Pretenders to the throne of the Two Sicilies
 * Propose renaming Category:Politicians of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies to Category:Politicians of the Two Sicilies
 * Propose renaming Category:Prime ministers of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies to Category:Prime ministers of the Two Sicilies
 * Propose renaming Category:Naval officers of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies to Category:Naval officers of the Two Sicilies
 * Propose renaming Category:Monarchs of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies to Category:Monarchs of the Two Sicilies
 * Propose renaming Category:Kingdom of the Two Sicilies military personnel to Category:Military personnel of the Two Sicilies
 * Propose renaming Category:Emigrants from the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies to Category:Emigrants from the Two Sicilies
 * Propose renaming Category:Dukes in the Kingdom of The Two Sicilies to Category:Dukes in the Two Sicilies
 * Propose renaming Category:Diplomats of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies to Category:Diplomats of the Two Sicilies
 * Propose renaming Category:Ambassadors to the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies‎ to Category:Ambassadors to the Two Sicilies
 * Nominator's rationale: WP:CONCISE, WP:CONSISTENT & WP:NATURALNESS. The words of the Kingdom are redundant; there has only ever been 1 state in history called "the Two Sicilies" and that is the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. The main article is rightly called that way, but the category tree is inconsistent and often uses the words of the Kingdom in a very redundant manner as if there were other "Two Sicilies". It is common practice to leave the words of the Kingdom out, also in the articles themselves: Ferdinand I of the Two Sicilies, not Ferdinand I of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. (Needlessly long; we know we're not talking about ; we aren't silly about the Two Sicilies as such only ever having been a kingdom.) Therefore, I propose a clear rule of thumb based on established practice (citing real and imagined examples to make the point):
 * Fooers of the Two Sicilies when grouping royals and people by occupation in direct service to the state: Category:Princes of Bourbon-Two Sicilies, Category:Princesses of Bourbon-Two Sicilies, Category:Monarchs of the Two Sicilies, Category:Queens consort of the Two Sicilies, Category:Dukes in the Two Sicilies (see parent Category:Dukes in Italy), Category:Prime ministers of the Two Sicilies, Category:Politicians of the Two Sicilies, Category:Naval officers of the Two Sicilies‎, Category:Military personnel of the Two Sicilies‎, etc.
 * Fooers from the Two Sicilies when grouping non-royals, such as emigrants or people by occupation not (necessarily) in direct service to the state. Category:Emigrants from the Two Sicilies, Category:Diplomats from the Two Sicilies etc. based on many precedents (such as the People from Fooland naming convention established by Category:People from the Russian Empire).
 * Fooers to the Two Sicilies exclusively for ambassadors to, missionaries to, immigrants to, pretenders to the throne of etc. following those category trees' naming conventions. Category:Ambassadors to the Two Sicilies; Category:Pretenders to the throne of the Two Sicilies etc..
 * This should make this tree a lot easier and more consistent. Moved to full after speedy renaming of Category:Royal consorts of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies ran into procedural problems. NLeeuw (talk) 17:21, 4 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Category:Royal consorts of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies to Category:Queens consort of the Two Sicilies – C2C: Siblings Category:Queens consort of Sardinia, Category:Queens consort of Italy, Category:Queens consort of Bosnia, etc NLeeuw (talk) 08:27, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * it should become Category:Queens consort of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies in order to satisfy C2C. I like your variant better, but that way it can't be speedied. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:46, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I think the "of the Kingdom" part is redundant. The Category:Princes of Bourbon-Two Sicilies and Category:Princesses of Bourbon-Two Sicilies demonstrate we don't need them, certainly not when we're talking about the royal class. Category:Monarchs of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies is also redundant; just "monarchs of the Two Sicilies" will suffice, as all members demonstrate (e.g. Ferdinand I of the Two Sicilies, not Ferdinand I of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. There hasn't been any other state called "the Two Sicilies" but this Kingdom. But I guess you're right that both the "of the Kingdom" variant and the shortened version are about evenly spread within the tree, so we can't say the shortened version is overwhelmingly used within the tree. I'd rather move to full than keep those redundant words, so I guess that's what we'll have to do then. NLeeuw (talk) 17:13, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –<b style="color:#77b">Laundry</b><b style="color:#fb0">Pizza</b><b style="color:#b00">03</b> ( d c̄ ) 02:55, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Rename, more concise. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:54, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I respectfully disagree. The term Two Sicilies is used informally or formally to describe the two parts of the Sicilian kingdom at any time starting with the Sicilian Vespers of 1282. A contrario, the expression Kingdom of the Two Sicilies specifically refers to the kingdom as it existed between 1816 and 1860. Hey, main article Kingdom of the Two Sicilies starts with a hatnote and two (!) explanatory paragraphs about the Name and the Background / Origins of the two kingdoms, this gives a hint that the term is ambiguous. In my opinion, it is too ambiguous to be used in a category name without introducing blur in the actual scope of the categories. Place Clichy (talk) 07:40, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Place Clichy Alright, let's have a look.
 * Two Sicilies redirects to Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. If it's so ambiguous, why this a redirect rather than a disambiguation page?
 * There is a Two Sicilies (disambiguation), which identifies Kingdom of the Two Sicilies as the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The other items aren't actual page titles, except Two Sicilies national football team, which is an irregular, not internationally recognised team which excludes the island of Sicily itself (ironically), but pretends to represent "the Two Sicilies", in other words, the Kingdom which ceased to exist in 1860. Two Sicilies independence movement redirects to Southern Italy autonomist movements. Two Sicilies (region) redirects to Southern Italy alias Mezzogiorno (including Sardinia, which was never part of the Two Sicilies, but of Piedmont-Sardinia). The last two items aren't even pages, but a dynastic title and a translation, both of which refer to the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies and nothing else.
 * Two Sicilies ducat is defined as the currency of Kingdom of the Two Sicilies.
 * So I don't see ambiguity. NLeeuw (talk) 05:55, 12 September 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.
 * Rename per nom. From my understanding there are really only two other uses for the term "Two Sicilies": a name collectively referring to the Kingdom of Sicily and the Kingdom of Naples and to the general geographic region of Southern Italy. Of these three, clearly "List of X from the Two Sicilies" would really only refer to the unified Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. Any lists referring to the separate Kingdoms of Naples and Sicily would be separate, and those for the modern day region would just use "Southern Italy". I see very little possible confusion there. estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:49, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't have an opinion of Two sicilies versus kingdom of. But I would encourage someone to double check that the renamings for the categories template are accurate. I found several typos in the nomination. . I don't know how the bot works on these. Mason (talk) 22:54, 12 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose The main article of these categories is Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. Armbrust The Homunculus 05:20, 16 September 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:Thirteenth Tsardom
<div class="boilerplate cfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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: Moot Category was speedy deleted as a sock creation. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 23:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Thirteenth Tsardom to Category:Faraway Tsardom
 * Nominator's rationale: This is a result of a mistranslation by a person not fluent in Russian: Тридевятое царство literally means "Thrice-ninth Tsardom" and figiratively "Faraway Tsardom" (I already moved the article). - Altenmann >talk 00:35, 12 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Article is called Faraway Tsardom, Thirteenth Tsardom is a removed mistranslation. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 17:16, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I took the liberty to merge two discussions about the same category. (See Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_September_14.) Marcocapelle (talk) 20:19, 14 September 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:Indian journalists by language
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 22%23Category:Indian journalists by language

Category:Indian dramatists and playwrights by language
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 22%23Category:Indian dramatists and playwrights by language

Category:Television series written by Umera Ahmad
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 22%23Category:Television series written by Umera Ahmad

Category:Quotients
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 22%23Category:Quotients