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. MER-C 17:23, 12 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Udaipur user templates to Category:Indian city user templates

Nominator's rationale: Category contains a single template. I propose upmerge to Category:Indian city user templates. —⁠ andrybak ( talk) 16:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Merge we don't need a category with only one userbox. Catfurball ( talk) 16:34, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Support Abhishek0831996 ( talk) 14:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply

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 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. MER-C 17:24, 12 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Ski lift manufacturers into Category:Aerial lift manufacturers, as the two are very similar, and the only pages in Category:Ski lift manufacturers are also in Category:Aerial lift manufacturers. Tboa talk. 15:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• Merge per nom. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 05:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply

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 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 with redirect bibliomaniac 1 5 06:43, 19 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Sahabah to Category:Companions of the Prophet

Nominator's rationale: rename to align with the main article Companions of the Prophet. This might have been listed at WP:CFDS, but I am not sure if it is perhaps controversial. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:53, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Comment. Sahabah is a redirect to Companions of the Prophet, per the RM discussion at Talk:Companions_of_the_Prophet#Requested_move_9_March_2019. The titles of these categories should reflect that. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• rename, leaving redirect. Peterkingiron ( talk) 15:18, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• rename to Category:Companions of Muhammad, we don't take sides ( WP:POV) or what is the Prophet, singular and capitalized. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 05:00, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• While that may well be a fair point, I guess that should be discussed in article space first. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:43, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply

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 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. It would need clearer agreement than this to change the patterns of "Female" within Category:Female religious workers or "Sahabah" within Category:Companions of the Prophet. – Fayenatic London 08:39, 11 November 2020 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Female Sahabah to Category:Women Sahabah

Nominator's rationale: rename, we usually have "women" categories when it concerns people. (In addition, rename to Category:Women companions of the Prophet or Category:Women Companions of the Prophet dependent on the nomination above.) Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Oppose because "women" is not an adjective. M Imtiaz ( talk · contribs) 13:57, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Women + noun is appropriate English anyway (e.g. Category:Women architects, Category:Women centenarians). We have had an extensive discussion about "female" versus "women" quite some time ago and consensus was in favor of "women" but I cannot find it now. @ BrownHairedGirl: do you perhaps remember when this discussion took place? Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:36, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• @ Marcocapelle, there was a monster nomination at WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 April 27#Women/Men_or_Female/Male_as_an_adjective, which reached no consensus.

Since then, AFAIK there has been no other mass nomination of female/women cats, but there have been some smaller groups. I can't find the groups right now, but I did find these two noms: WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 6#Category:French_women_judges and WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 2#Category:Female_diplomats. Hope that helps a bit. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs)

• Comment. Sahabah is a redirect to Companions of the Prophet, per the RM discussion at Talk:Companions_of_the_Prophet#Requested_move_9_March_2019. The titles of these categories should reflect that. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• (as nom) I am perfectly fine with also changing "Sahabah" to "Companions of the Prophet" in the category title. Marcocapelle ( talk) 10:06, 10 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• Rename in line with my comment above. unless WP is taking the position that the one and only capital Prophet is Muhammad. I think the article's title ought to be renamed as well; unless we're up for redirecting The Savior to Jesus to please another billion people by adopting their terminology. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 05:03, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply

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 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. – Fayenatic London 08:14, 11 November 2020 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Non-Muslim interactants with Muslims during Muhammad's era to Category:Opponents of Muhammed Category:Opponents of Muhammad

Nominator's rationale: rename and rescope based on a more defining characteristic, and it also leads to a shorter title. Purge articles of people who were not an opponent of Muhammed. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:43, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Comment. Isn't the main article Non-Muslim interactants with Muslims during Muhammad's era? That said, I can see the defining characteristic issue. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 08:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Support The meaning of the category needs to be more clear. Abhishek0831996 ( talk) 14:46, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment 1: surely you mean Category:Opponents of Muhammad. Comment 2: took a while to figure out the originally intended target population. From what I have understood of the discussions surrounding the main article (still not completely sure though), it is supposed to contain every non-Muslim that was part of Muhammad's history in one way or another. They, however, are not necessarily opponents, such as the Christian Egyptian ruler Muqawqis. -- HyperGaruda ( talk) 20:48, 21 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Thanks for detecting the spelling error. It is not a good idea to categorize every non-Muslim that was part of Muhammad's history in one way or another, that goes against WP:OCASSOC and WP:CATDEF. Marcocapelle ( talk) 10:03, 10 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• Split: into Category:Christians of Muhammad's era, Category:Jews of Muhammad's era and Category:Arab pagans. With the opponents category, we lose track of those who were not really opponents like Bahira, Waraqah ibn Nawfal, Christian community of Najran and a few others. Also, I think that it's better for "opponent" categories to be defined against a particular ideology or movement, instead of a person, e.g. Opponents to Islam / Critics of Islam, but I prefer splitting as stated earlier. @ Wiqi55: knows a lot about Prophetic biography and could help here. Al-Andalusi ( talk) 01:42, 9 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• While I am not against a split by all means (also not thrilled by the idea), the names of Category:Christians of Muhammad's era, Category:Jews of Muhammad's era and Category:Arab pagans are very unclear. It is not about an era (anyone having lived between 570-632), but it is about having (en)countered Muhammad. And "Arab pagans" does not even mention the era. Marcocapelle ( talk) 10:03, 10 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• A better alternative is Category:Christians of early Islam, Category:Jews of early Islam, Category:Arab pagans of early Islam. "Early Islam" is commonly used in academic sources; short for the early history of Islam. Wiqi ⁽⁵⁵⁾ 20:27, 10 October 2020 (UTC) reply

• "Early Islam" may also include the entire period of the Rashidun Caliphate. Besides I have been checking the articles and in quite a few cases the religious conviction of the subject is not mentioned. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC) reply

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 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. MER-C 18:03, 12 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Films directed by Dasari Yoganand to Category:Films directed by D. Yoganand

Nominator's rationale: Match the parent article Kailash29792 (talk) 05:45, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Support To match the article. Abhishek0831996 ( talk) 14:55, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply

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 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. MER-C 17:24, 12 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:The World's Most Dangerous Band members to Category:Paul Shaffer and the World's Most Dangerous Band members

Nominator's rationale: Article space does not treat these as separate topics. The World's Most Dangerous Band redirects to Paul Shaffer and the World's Most Dangerous Band. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Support per nom for clarity. Abhishek0831996 ( talk) 15:09, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply

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

The result of the discussion was: speedy rename per WP:C2E, WP:G7 ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:43, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Propose merging Category:Regina Marina personnel to Category:Regia Marina personnel

Nominator's rationale: I happened to misspell the name and as thus would like it changed. Lettler ^hello 03:27, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

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 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. MER-C 18:03, 12 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:British military personnel killed at the Battle of the Somme to Category:British military personnel killed in the Battle of the Somme

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:C2C. All other categories covering British military personnel killed in action use "in" instead of "at" as the preposition. Lettler ^hello 03:07, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Support Abhishek0831996 ( talk) 14:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• Support For consistency reasons. Dimadick ( talk) 15:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• Support per nom. Grutness... wha? 04:26, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• Speedy rename per WP:C2C. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 05:14, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• support per nom -- Lenticel ^{( talk)} 00:27, 10 September 2020 (UTC) reply

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 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 as nominated without prejudice to a further nomination There are several different issues raised in the debate and dealing with the initial one is the best way forward. Timrollpickering ( talk) 13:51, 26 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Sahabah participated in battle of Badr to Category:Sahabah who participated in the battle of Badr
• Propose renaming Category:Sahabah participated in battle of Uhud to Category:Sahabah who participated in the battle of Uhud

Nominator's rationale: I think these categories are missing some words; I propose adding "who" and "the". Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:00, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete, participation in a battle is not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

If you're not familiar with Islamic history, of course not. But for those who are, it is obvious that participation in those battles is more about the battles themselves; it's about the point in time at which they joined the religion. The Sahaba who fought at Badr hold a special status in Islam for that reason. M Imtiaz ( talk · contribs) 13:56, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• 1) Participation in a battle actually tells very little about the point in time at which they joined Islam (it only tells they joined any time before the battle, resulting in a stretch of 14 years in the case of Badr). 2) What is this special status about? Please refer to reliable sources. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:16, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• 2) Marcocapelle, this was significant for calculating stipends under the divan system. Consider this source (PDF) The highest stipends went to those Muslims who had fought at the battle of Badr and progressively smaller amounts were given to those who converted and fought for Islam later. VR _talk 21:49, 9 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• That is clearly not a defining characteristic either. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Rename per nom; I'm guessing the author was not a native speaker. M Imtiaz ( talk · contribs) 13:56, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment. Sahabah is a redirect to Companions of the Prophet, per the RM discussion at Talk:Companions_of_the_Prophet#Requested_move_9_March_2019. The titles of these categories should reflect that. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:45, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• Rename per nom. Also, in light of BrownHairedGirl's comments it might just make sense to rename them to "Muslims who fought in Battle of Uhud". Changing "Sahaba" to "Muslims" makes it neutral without losing any precision, since the definition of Sahaba includes all Muslims who met the prophet Muhammad. VR _talk 21:40, 9 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• If the category is kept, I agree on Category:Muslim participants in the battle of Badr and Category:Muslim participants in the battle of Uhud. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:49, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• I agree with this also, if the categories are kept. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:10, 18 September 2020 (UTC) reply

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.