From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< April 23 April 25 >

April 24

Category:Longest serving

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 to Category:Lists of longest serving people by occupation. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:50, 5 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: More precise scope and per Official. Brandmeister talk 21:07, 24 April 2021 (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.

Category:Filipino contemporary pianists

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:42, 3 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: There is no scheme for Category:Contemporary pianists nor is Category:Filipino pianists overly populated to require this breakdown. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 19:25, 24 April 2021 (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.

Category:Recipients of the Order of Karađorđe's Star

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:41, 3 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Nondefining award. Checked several bios and it is listed with others if at all. The people to which it was awarded such as Edvard Beneš, Nicholas II of Russia, Ahmet Rıza, Novak Djokovic, Pavle Đurišić, etc. are much better known for other things. ( t · c) buidhe 17:28, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Note I created collapsible list of recipients so no information is lost and proposed adding it in the main article's talk page. ( Order of Karađorđe's Star is a "Good Article" so I'm not being bold.) - RevelationDirect ( talk) 18:23, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I looked at just the Serbian recipients like Queen Maria of Yugoslavia, violinist Stefan Milenkovich, and Colonel Aleksandar Mašin where the award generally is mentioned in passing. The award was recently added to the intro of the Air Serbia airline article, but I respectfully disagree with that placement. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 18:33, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, obvious case of WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle ( talk) 11:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. All nobility receive huge numbers of non-defining and trivial honors; these awards are almost exclusively cited to the awarding org/country (PRIMARY) and thus not even DUE in an article most of the time. JoelleJay ( talk) 19:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete.per nom. -- Just N. ( talk) 07:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Major state honour usually awarded to citizens of Serbia and Yugoslavia. Clearly defining. Ludicrous nomination and suggests that some editors are determined to delete all categories for awards. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 13:31, 29 April 2021 (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.

Category:Judeo-Kurdish languages

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:40, 3 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: It appears that several months ago, Away Inn tried to nominate this category for deletion with the rationale: None of these five languages is Kurdish. In fact, none of them is even indo-Iranian as the Kurdish languages. These languages are all variants of Aramaic which is a Semitic language. This page is misleading since it portrays these Judeo-Aramaic languages ( see Judeo-Aramaic languages ) as Kurdish. There is already a category of Judeo-Aramaic languages - hence, this category should be deleted. The rationale is entirely correct, and I agree with the deletion. ( t · c) buidhe 17:03, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep because these languages are/were spoken in Kurdish areas where Jews lived and created there own dialects and sub-languages, such as (from the articles themselves):
    • Barzani Jewish Neo-Aramaic: "It was originally spoken in three villages near Aqrah in Iraqi Kurdistan."
    • Betanure Jewish Neo-Aramaic, "the local dialect of Betanure --> "is a village in Dohuk Governorate in Kurdistan Region, Iraq"
    • Hulaulá language: "Trans-Zab Jewish Neo-Aramaic, also known as Hulaulá (lit. 'Jewish'),[2] is a grouping of related dialects of Northeastern Neo-Aramaic originally spoken by Jews in Iranian Kurdistan and easternmost Iraqi Kurdistan."
    • Lishana Deni: Zakho Jewish Neo-Aramaic[2][3][4] is a dialect of Northeastern Neo-Aramaic originally spoken by Jews in northern Iraq and southeastern Turkey in the lands west of the Great Zab." --> "The Great Zab or Upper Zab (Arabic: الزاب الكبير‎ (al-Zāb al-Kabīr), Kurdish: Zêy Badînan‎ or Zêyê Mezin, Turkish: Zap, Syriac: ܙܒܐ ܥܠܝܐ‎ (zāba ʻalya)) is an approximately 400-kilometre (250 mi) long river flowing through Turkey and Iraq."
    • Lishanid Noshan": "Inter-Zab Jewish Neo-Aramaic[2][3][4] is a modern Jewish-Aramaic dialect, a variant of Northeastern Neo-Aramaic. It was originally spoken in Kurdistan Region of Iraq, in and around Arbil between the Great Zab and Little Zab rivers."
  • NOTE: All the above quotes were from the introductions in the articles withing Category:Judeo-Kurdish languages. Note also that many "Jewish" languages are hybrids of different languages and can be categorized as part of both, such as Yiddish which is mainly a combination of High German and Hebrew as well other languages depending on where Jews lived. And like Ladino a combination of Spanish and Hebrew as well as other languages and dialects depending on where Jews lived. IZAK ( talk) 19:30, 25 April 2021 (UTC) reply
    • Yeah, it's spoken in Kurdistan but that doesn't make it a Kurdish language any more than Breton is a French language! ( t · c) buidhe 23:01, 25 April 2021 (UTC) reply
      • @ Buidhe:... but they are languages of KURDISTAN! Depends how you look at it. IZAK ( talk) 20:34, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, overlaps with Category:Jewish Northeastern Neo-Aramaic dialects which is the more accurate term. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Especially Marcocapelle's comment is convincing! -- Just N. ( talk) 07:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - At a pinch, we might rename to Category:Neo-Aramaic languages of Kurdistan or leave a cat redirect to Category:Jewish Northeastern Neo-Aramaic dialects, but better not. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:32, 2 May 2021 (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.

Religious behaviour and experience

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: option B rename. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:52, 5 May 2021 (UTC) reply
OPTION A rename to behaviour and experience
OPTION B: rename to practices
Nominator's rationale: rename to align the format within the tree. This is follow-up on this earlier discussion. @ TSventon: thank you for pointing to this discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:42, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support Option B. The other IMHO seems quite vague/nebulous. Opt B is short and crisp! -- Just N. ( talk) 07:37, 28 April 2021 (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.

Category:Nuclear energy in Argentina

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 July 21#Category:Nuclear energy in Argentina

Category:Knights of the Supreme Order of Christ

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:38, 3 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: It does not appear that this is defining for most recipients since it is awarded only to heads of countries such as Éamon de Valera, Konrad Adenauer, Otto von Bismarck, Charles de Gaulle, Francisco Franco, Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, etc. who are much better known for other things. Already listified at Supreme Order of Christ. ( t · c) buidhe 05:13, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Note I expanded the existing list within the main article, Supreme Order of Christ, so it includes all the category contents. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 08:39, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Based on the list in the article, I added several non-head of state recipients to the category like Heinrich von Heß, Peter Anton von Verschaffelt, & Massimo Stanzione but maybe I shouldn't have because they don't even mention the award. ( Edmund Waterton mentions the award in the lede but is an outlier.) The vast majority of the category contents for this Catholic/Papal award are heads of state as the nom describes, which generally mention the award as part of a long list of honours. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 08:58, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, obvious case of WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle ( talk) 12:14, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. OCAWARD, and frequently with this type of honor the only RS to support it is from the awarding org/country or from the recipient's website (both PRIMARY), so the info is arguably not even DUE in the article. JoelleJay ( talk) 19:22, 26 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. -- Just N. ( talk) 07:49, 28 April 2021 (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.

Category:Knights of the Order of Saint Hubert

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:37, 3 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Nondefining order of chivalry given out mostly to royalty. Not at all defining for Alfonso XIII, Duke Adolf Friedrich of Mecklenburg, Abdul Hamid II, Otto von Bismarck, Gyula Andrássy, etc. ( t · c) buidhe 05:03, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Note I created collapsible list of recipients so no information is lost and proposed adding it in the main article's talk page. ( Order of Saint Hubert is a "Good Article" so I'm not being bold.) - RevelationDirect ( talk) 09:49, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Per nom, doesn't seem defining to the many noble people who received it. Generally listed as part of a long list of honours. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 09:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, obvious case of WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle ( talk) 12:15, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. One award among dozens the recipients receive, often sourceable only to the awarding org/country or to a list on the recipient's website (PRIMARY, and so arguably UNDUE in the first place). JoelleJay ( talk) 19:25, 26 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. -- Just N. ( talk) 07:50, 28 April 2021 (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.

Category:Knights of the Order of Saint John (Bailiwick of Brandenburg)

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:37, 3 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Nondefining award, listed with others if at all. Not remotely defining for Otto von Bismarck, Gustav von Senden-Bibran, Emil von Schlitz, Miklós Horthy, Edward VII, Edwin Freiherr von Manteuffel, etc. ( t · c) buidhe 04:54, 24 April 2021 (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.

Category:Recipients of the Order of the White Eagle (Serbia)

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:36, 3 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Nondefining award, tends to be listed with others in bios. None of those I checked at random ( Georgios Kondylis, Prince Tomislav of Yugoslavia, Desmond de Silva (barrister), Sir James Horlick, 4th Baronet, Mārtiņš Peniķis, Čedomilj Mijatović, Archduke Otto of Austria (1865–1906), Louis IV, Grand Duke of Hesse, etc.) indicate definingness. ( t · c) buidhe 04:49, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Note I added a list of recipients in the main article, Order of the White Eagle (Serbia), for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 12:53, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Queen Victoria, Douglas MacArthur, and Higashifushimi Yorihito are not remotely defined by receiving this award as a diplomatic souvenir. Even amongst the Serbian recipients, it generally gets a passing mention in a list of honours. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 10:14, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, obvious case of WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle ( talk) 12:16, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. This inevitably gets sourced to the recipient's lists of honors and/or to a press release from the awarding party (PRIMARY), so clearly not defining. JoelleJay ( talk) 19:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. -- Just N. ( talk) 07:50, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Major state honour usually awarded to citizens of Serbia and Yugoslavia. Clearly defining. Ludicrous nomination and suggests that some editors are determined to delete all categories for awards. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 13:30, 29 April 2021 (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.

Category:Knights of the Golden Fleece of Spain

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:59, 5 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Nondefining order of chivalry. Seems to be mostly awarded to royalty due to their positions. Not at all defining for Charles XV, Abdul Hamid II, Constantine II of Greece, Otto von Bismarck, etc. ( t · c) buidhe 04:45, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Opera hat: Even if we assume that Spanish recipients are defined by the award (which we respectfully disagree on), about 2/3 or 3/4 of the category contents are foreign recipients like George V, Albert II of Belgium, and Emperor Akihito. In contrast, WP:OCAWARD is looking for a "large majority" to be defined by the award to have a category. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 18:03, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
On the list of Knights, on the English-language Wikipedia of course it is more likely that foreign heads of state will be blue links (and therefore present in this category) and native Spanish knights will be red links (and therefore absent). But that need not be the case forever. Opera hat ( talk) 19:38, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Even on eswiki the majority of notable recipients are foreign: [1] and the Spanish ones I checked don't appear to be defined by this award: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] ( t · c) buidhe 20:08, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Alongside OCAWARD, receipt of this honor by contemporary people is sourced almost exclusively to primary sources, indicating it has very little defining impact. JoelleJay ( talk) 20:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. The Order of the Golden Fleece is literally one of the most prestigious and oldest orders of chivalry, just as renowned as the Order of the Garter. The notion of "majority" cited in previous comments established a dubious equivalence between the way the category is populated and the actual recipients of the award. Among 21st-century recipients of the Spanish branch of the Order, at least Adolfo Suárez, Javier Solana, Víctor García de la Concha and Enrique V. Iglesias are notable recipients which are neither royalty or foreign heads of state, and all their articles mention the award prominently. There are recipients of similar value at any other period of history. This seems pretty defining to me. Place Clichy ( talk) 22:32, 26 April 2021 (UTC) reply
None of those pages features the award prominently at all, unless a one-sentence mention is now considered "defining". The supporting citation in each one isn't even IRS. JoelleJay ( talk) 01:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC) reply
@ JoelleJay: Under this rationale all or nearly all categories about orders and decorations would be deleted. By definition most people are awarded such decorations because they are primarily known for something else (although not just because of their birth as the nomination seems to imply, by amalgamation). Margaret Thatcher's article merely mentions the Order of the Garter en passant, I guess that the same rationale would therefore make you consider the Garter as a non-defining order of chivalry. These citations are easily verifiable and I don't think any good faith editor would challenge the fact that Adolfo Suárez was awarded the Golden Fleece. The main point here is that the part of the nominating rationale saying that it "Seems to be mostly awarded to royalty due to their positions" is plain wrong, and the rest of the rationale is debatable. Place Clichy ( talk) 22:21, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Neither the Order of the Smile nor the Order of the Garter are part of this nomination. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 23:11, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Then I suggest you nominate them, with your usual rationale that they have been awarded to royalty and heads of state. I even suggest that you make a bundle nomination with all recipient categories of all orders so awarded. Most of them are much less notable and defining that the present nomination. Place Clichy ( talk) 05:51, 29 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Bundled nominations have often ended in "No Consensus" because editors correctly point out that there are differences between the awards. Collectively these noms are hitting different awards from different areas so no single country is being singled out. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 12:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • "Under this rationale all or nearly all categories about orders and decorations would be deleted." Yes, the whole point of WP:OCAWARD is that we allow award categories only in exceptional situations. By far most awards face the paradoxal situation that notable people are not defined by the award while non-notable people who would be defined by the award do not have an article in wp. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:28, 29 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Which recipient categories would be left, then? Just that of the Victoria Cross and maybe the Hero of the Soviet Union? Place Clichy ( talk) 05:51, 29 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. -- Just N. ( talk) 07:51, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Major state honour usually awarded to citizens of Spain. Clearly defining. Ludicrous nomination and suggests that some editors are determined to delete all categories for awards. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 13:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep until or unless we get rid of the OBE etc., since this is the Spanish equivalent. There have been a whole lot of nominations of award categories over the past week and it is difficult to keep track of them. I don't like the inconsistency that is likely to result and, really, I'd prefer that they'd be nominated together rather than in drips and drabs. Furius ( talk) 18:14, 29 April 2021 (UTC) reply
    • @ Furius: Sadly, I think most of the editors who back deletion here would actually like to get rid of all honours categories, including the Order of the British Empire etc! Unfortunately, most CfDs are not well attended, so they will probably be successful and claim consensus because two or three editors are in favour of deletion. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 09:02, 30 April 2021 (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.

Category:DÜWAG

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. The article was moved via RM, so we will match the article name per the usual guideline. If there is a concern that the article is spelled incorrectly, that should be taken up with a new RM of the article. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:34, 3 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per C2D, align with article name. Kinroz7 ( talk) 04:35, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Rename per nom. Could have been posted at CFDS. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 17:45, 25 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Rename per nom. -- Just N. ( talk) 08:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep -- This will be the correct spelling. German uses the alternative of inserting an "e" after the U in capitalising words with this diacritical. The policy in WP is that words should be correctly spelt, but with redirects from unaccented equivalents. If the main article has been renamed, that should be reversed (but leaving a redirect). Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:39, 2 May 2021 (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.

Category:The Preatures members

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per G7 and parent category Category:Musicians by band – categories should not be created when only one member has an article. I wasn't aware of the category's guidelines until a recent discussion about a similar category I had created. Sean Stephens ( talk) 04:15, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Sean Stephens, if you agree with deletion you could manually empty the category and tag it as CSD G7/C1. (But it's also fine to use CfD if you're looking for further input). -- Paul_012 ( talk) 17:45, 25 April 2021 (UTC) reply
    • @ Paul 012: Thank you for noting that. I would've done that already but I was concerned about how it would look – given multiple categories I've created have been nominated here in recent times (something which is my own fault, because I've previously misunderstood/not read relevant guidelines). Sean Stephens ( talk) 23:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. -- Just N. ( talk) 07:52, 28 April 2021 (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.

Category:Traffic participants

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: upmerge to Category:Transport for now. If anyone wants to take another crack at a category under a different name, the contents were Commuter (a redirect), Passenger, Pedestrian, and Stowaway. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:43, 28 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:CATNAME and the spirit of WP:C2C
This category contains 3 articles: Passenger, Pedestrian, & Stowaway. I was looking for a merge target given the small size but these aren't Category:Transport occupations and they should stay somewhere under the Category:Transport tree. The roles are associated with transport in general, not traffic specifically, and the new name matches the category tree. (I'm submitting this through CFD instead of WP:CFSD since I suspect there may be a better merge target I just missed.) - RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Maybe? I think this grouping was for people who are not paid but maybe that's categorizing by something they're not. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 07:58, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Double Hmmmm I was going to suggest "Transport users", but not only are they not paid, some are not even paying. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 09:33, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Would Category:Transport culture be a reasonable option? And should Hitch-hiking also go in there? Grutness... wha? 03:56, 25 April 2021 (UTC) reply
I'm open to that. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 18:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Merge to Category:People in transport, the category differentiates itself insufficiently from its parent category. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC) reply
    • Not too keen on that - The "People in..." categories are for specific biographical articles, not for articles about (for want of a better term) occupations. Grutness... wha? 03:16, 26 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • The subcategories are for specific biographical articles but the top category does not contain any articles yet. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:11, 26 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • It did contain loose articles as I recall, but I diffused them prior to nomination. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 18:38, 26 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • After that, it seems that merge is still a serious option then. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:46, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. The existing category name is good and comprehensive! Articles like [:Pedestrian]] are not fitting to the renaming proposal. --- Just N. ( talk) 08:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • If not merged, I agree that we can just as well keep the current category name. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:43, 28 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Merge to Category:Transport? These are pretty basic concepts, so it would make sense for them to be in the root category. Furius ( talk) 01:05, 5 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Note To Closer This certainly feels more like a RFC than a traditional CFD. As the nominator, I have no objection to any of the alternate proposals above. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:23, 12 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • UpMerge to Category:Transport, per User:Furius. Not suggesting merging to the "people in" cat, because these are not specific people, these are types of people. - jc37 12:46, 26 May 2021 (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.

Category:Lontar foundation training participants

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:CATNAME, MOS:PROPER, & the spirit of WP:C2C
Some volunteers with the Lontar Foundation coordinate with Wikimedia Indonesia to create more biography articles in English Wikipieda and this is a user category for those participants. "Lontar Foundation" is a proper name. Subcategories of Category:Wikipedia user space generally start with "Wikipedian" or "Users" and Category:Wikipedian Peace Corps volunteers‎ is the closest naming format I could find. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
We need to at least capitalize the "F". I'm fine with any alternate rename that does that.- RevelationDirect ( talk) 23:14, 28 April 2021 (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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_April_24&oldid=1035988609"