From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 3 January 5 >

January 4

Category:Pages with misplaced templates

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 19#Category:Pages with misplaced templates

Category:Fiction narrated by a dead person

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) 04:28, 12 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining category that does not define the films themself. This type of categorization is poor as it weakly connects the films in the category by the use of a deceased character narration in the film. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ ( talk) 21:20, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete not defining - clearly a scene a faire for several genres and also several films are narrated by several characters some who survive and others who don't (see the book Dracula for example). Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 23:52, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete This is categoration by a minor artistic choice. The choice of who does the narration is not a defining part of fictional works. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 13:49, 5 January 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:Comic book characters in other media

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) 04:27, 12 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: It's unclear what excludes something from one category or the other, making this redundant. Appears that the user has since received a topic ban from category creation. -- 2pou ( talk) 20:30, 4 January 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.

Scientists and descent

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) 03:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEGRS. Following this discussion about the Italian descent category and together with discussions below #Category:American scientists of Pakistani descent and #Category:Canadian scientists by descent, scientists are defined by their nationality (and of course their field of study), but categories of scientists by country of their ancestors without a reference to their actual nationality serve little apparent purpose. Place Clichy ( talk) 18:32, 4 January 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:Canadian scientists by descent

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, but I am merging the contents to the appropriate "Canadian people of FOOian descent" as a default. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:21, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEGRS. Following this discussion about the Italian descent category, like the other discussion below, there seems to be consensus that the mere country of descent is not a defining factor for scientists that would justify these category intersections. Also note that in most cases these categories seem to be used for expatriates rather than descent. Place Clichy ( talk) 18:16, 4 January 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.

Asian-American film directors

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) 04:23, 12 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Also containerize, per Place Clichy. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:54, 10 January 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.

American-Indian businesspeople

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) 04:20, 12 January 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.

Asian-American businesspeople

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 and containerize. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:18, 12 January 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.

American aviators of Asian descent

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 conseusus to delete/merge, so rename as nominated. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:48, 19 January 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.

Asian-American female aviators

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:American female aviators and Category:American aviators of Asian descent, the latter of which was created as result of this discussion, which was discussed concurrently. The two discussions were read together. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:48, 19 January 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.

Indigenous American female aviators

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 to delete/merge, so rename as nominated. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:25, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Rename Category:Indigenous American female aviators to Category:Native American female aviators
  • Nominator's rationale This is the only sub-cat of Category:Native American women that does not use the Native American form in the name. It is also the only sub-cat of Category:Native American people by occuation to use this form. All other categories either use Native American, or use a specific ethnic designation (such as Category:Navajo judges). Well there are some sub-cats of Category:Native American sportspeople that refer to a specific institution, but that is a different issue). There is very good reason for this. 1-the standard usage in the United States is Native American. 2-this is a specific ethnic group, we categorize by ethnic group, and usually assume one limit to an ethnic group is residing in a specific country. 3-the current name is more ambiguous, and could in theory by some be thought to refer to an Otavalo involved in aviation, who never even flew his plane within the airpspace of the United States of America, let alone set food on the ground in that country. Even if our Otavalo friend had infact flown on occasion to the US (which would be not a surprise), he would only be maybe part of this intended category if he became a permanent resident of the US. I will leave it to others to debate whether an immigrants from the highlands of Peru who speaks at best broken Spanish as a second language and becomes a permanent resident in the United States qualifies as "Native American" or weather he should be classed as "Hispanic and Latino American". My sister-in-law is an even more confounding individual. This is not just a hypothetical question, although I do not know there are many Otavalo in the US, I do know there are huge numbers of Nahuatl and people from various Mayan ethnic groups, as well as from other ethnic groups indigenous to Mexico and I am certain that the number of people throughout the US who are ethniclly part of groups indigenous to South American is in the thousands, far less than the millions of Americans who are ethnically linked to Spain, Portugal, or somewhere in Latin America. That number is about 40 million total (I could be off by a few million, but that is close enough for this discussion). The clear fact is we want to this unambiguously link the people to the United States and be clear to editors that is the meaning and intended scope. The target does this, this name does not. It is also the lone outlyier against over 30 other categories using the Native American form. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 14:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Rename per nom. Place Clichy ( talk) 15:30, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Merge to parent categories as a double violation of WP:OCEGRS for gender and ethnicity (or if kept, rename per WP:C2C). Marcocapelle ( talk) 18:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete suffers the same problems all "descent" categories do (see User:Carlossuarez46/Descent categories). Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 23:55, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Rename per nom. Dimadick ( talk) 16:34, 5 January 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.

Chinese-American aviators

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 to delete/merge, so rename as nominated. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:21, 19 January 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.

Odia Diaspora

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/merge. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:15, 12 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • @ Carlossuarez46: how do you mean purge the first category? If the other categories are deleted, the first one becomes empty. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:44, 8 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • It's nothing but subcats now (no bios), so delete it too. My second comment above. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:51, 10 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support, but ensure that all articles end off with an Indian descent category. India is a big place, but (except where there are very clear sub-ethnicities, we do not normally have descent categories below country. Carlossuarez46 always opposes the existence of descetn categories, so that his vote should be discounted. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:41, 10 January 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:Political organizations of minorities

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) 04:12, 12 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Redundant with its only child, Category:Political parties of minorities, which is already correctly categorized. This near-empty intermediate level does not bring much value. Place Clichy ( talk) 14:01, 4 January 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.

Japanese-American theologians

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: purge and merge to Category:American theologians and Category:American people of Japanese descent/ Category:American people of Korean descent, as discussed. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:11, 12 January 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.

Asian-American theologians

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, mainly because it was the parent category for categories (discussed concurrently with this one) that were deleted. See here and here. It was difficult to read a consensus here, but I took these other discussions into account. This close does not preclude someone from creating some sort of category for theologians of Asian theology. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:42, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Comment This and its subcategories include individuals who would be considered scholars of Asian theology, as well as scholars of Asian American theology (which are, if it is not obvious, not the same, albeit overlapping). Kwok Pui-lan and Peter Phan have written in both discourses, Chung Hyun Kyung has written primarily in terms of Asian theology, and Grace Ji-Sun Kim has written in Asian American theology. Then you have others who have not touched these topics and are simply American theologians of Asian descent (e.g. Seyoon Kim). So it is quite an entangled category if you are wanting to get rid of descent categories.-- Caorongjin ( talk) 09:49, 5 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Precisely, the topic of interesting value for an encyclopedia here is Asian theology (or Asian-American theology). The ascendancy of theologians is quite irrelevant, and some Western or African Sinologists probably gave more important contributions to this topic than, say, Danny Yamashiro, the Hawaiian accident survivor turned televangelist. I am note sure that a category placed at the intersection of Asia and theology should be based on descent. Place Clichy ( talk) 16:28, 6 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • If renamed that way, it should also be reparented for sure. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:26, 7 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Whatever happens here should also take into consideration what is done with Category:African-American theologians and Category:Womanist theologians, and I wonder if is worth considering alongside this.-- Caorongjin ( talk) 10:05, 5 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • No it should not African-American is a specific ethnic identifier that refers to a defined group of people who formed as an ethnic group after over 250 years as a people in the United States. Asian American is a racial grouping, with disputed inclusion criteria, and grouping together people who generally think of themselves as specific ethnic sub-groups. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 19:24, 14 January 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.

Chinese-American theologians

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: purge and merge to Category:American theologians and Category:American people of Chinese descent, as discussed. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:06, 12 January 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:Murdered sportspeople

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) 04:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Trivial intersection. No notable WP:DEFINING link between the occupation and the manner of death. Not expected as a professional qualification. There may have been many years between the occupation and the death, making the link even weaker.
Note: Sources about the death of a person will often discuss both their occupation and their cause of death. This doesn't make this intersection any more notable than a combination with other aspects often discussed in such notices, such as their number of children.
See also: related rationale about suicides by occupation:
William Allen Simpson ( talk) 12:04, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, completely agree with nominator's rationale. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:43, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom; and my comments on similar categories. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:07, 5 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Both defining but the intersection is not defining, usually a coincidence. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 00:33, 5 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose Their fame may well be the cause of the murders. Dimadick ( talk) 16:38, 5 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • How do you mean "cause"? I would expect a statistical relationship between being notable and being murdered, but that is not unique to sportspeople. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:31, 7 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 17:07, 5 January 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:Art Nouveau architecture in Bangkok

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) 03:57, 12 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: While Category:Art Nouveau architecture by city is fairly established, none of the architecture-by-style-in-Thailand categories are subdivided as such, and the suggested parent isn't so large as to need subcategorisation. All the members are already otherwise categorised under Category:Buildings and structures in Bangkok. Paul_012 ( talk) 11:52, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per WP:SMALLCAT. Not every city needs this amount of diffusion and many sibling categories could be nominated as well. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:39, 4 January 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:American scientists of Pakistani descent

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. I have also taken into account the comments in the other related discussions on this page, here and here. I have not discounted Carlossuarez46's !vote, as was suggested. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:27, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCEGRS. Following this discussion about the Italian descent category, there seems to be consensus that the mere country of descent is not a defining factor for scientists that would justify these category intersections. Also note that in most cases these categories seem to be used for expatriates rather than descent. @ AleatoryPonderings, William Allen Simpson, Marcocapelle, Justus Nussbaum, and Good Olfactory: pinging contributors in the previous discussion. Place Clichy ( talk) 09:56, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete — triple and quadruple intersections that do not reflect any difference in scientific performance. So easy to create these intersection categories, and so hard to delete them. A neverending process.
    William Allen Simpson ( talk) 12:20, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose There is ample evidence that these intersections are seen as groups and defining. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 13:48, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    Anything specific? Place Clichy ( talk) 12:54, 6 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete all per nom and my nom at this discussion about the Italian descent category. In addition to WP:OCEGRS, there's also WP:BLP to consider. A quick look at some of the members of these categories shows that editors have been adding EGRS cats without sourcing. This isn't surprising, as the claim "of X descent" is pretty difficult to source directly. Also, Place Clichy, shouldn't the title of this section of the log be something like "American scientists by country of origin"? The current title suggests there's just one cat under discussion. AleatoryPonderings ( ???) ( !!!) 15:14, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Merge to Category:American people of Chinese descent etc., trivial intersections, e.g. the fact that someone has Pakistani grandparents have nothing to do with their performance as a scientist. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:31, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, I do not see a connection between somebody's descent and their occupation. – DarkGlow ( ✉) 15:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete same problems as usual for "descent" categories; see User:Carlossuarez46/Descent categories. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose The nomination ignores these people's ethnicity, which is far from trivial. Dimadick ( talk) 16:40, 5 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    Agree with this, to the extent that articles should stay in the general descent categories, since those are not nominated yet. That is why I changed "delete" to "merge". I would expect that nobody except Carlossuarez46 would oppose this merge. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:06, 5 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    Every time I look at an example these are either expatriates (rather than Americans of foreign descent), not defined by their ancestry or already in a multitude of other often redundant ethnic/descent categories. E.g. Farooq Azam, born and raised up to B.Sc. in Lahore, Pakistan, is already in no less than the following categories not affected by this nomination: American people of Pakistani descent, Pakistani emigrants to the United States, Pakistani expatriate academics and American academics of Pakistani descent, in addition to the real defining categories such as Pakistani microbiologists and Pakistani marine biologists. In the spirit of consensus I could live with an upmerge to the nearest non-occupation descent category, but that does not seem necessary here. Place Clichy ( talk) 12:54, 6 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    In essence we agree. Put it differently, I agree with deletion after having ensured that everyone is already in an appropriate expatriate or emigrant category. Those who are not (if any at all) should be added to a descent category. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:06, 7 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    In essence we agree indeed. However even in this case I would only add to a descent category articles for which this characteristic is defining and supported by reliable sources, a minimum per WP:EGRS and, in the case of living people, WP:BLPCAT. Every article does not have to be in a descent (or emigrant/expatriate) category at all cost if none applies. Place Clichy ( talk) 16:53, 8 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    True. Marcocapelle ( talk) 22:45, 8 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose -- These are all (or mostly) well populated. Carlossuarez46 always opposes descent categories, so that he vote should be discounted. My view is that, even with a multiple intersection, if it can be properly populated, it should be allowed to remain. We get something similar with expatriate sportspeople, where we frequently have to consider minuscule categories. Distant descents (several generations) should be discouraged, but those for immigrants and the children of immigrants should be allowed. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:21, 10 January 2021 (UTC) reply
    • Peterkingiron, I don't think your statement that Carlossuarez46's !vote should be "discounted" is fair. The position he holds is set out in the essay he linked to and is very consistently expressed in CFD discussions – he opposes "by descent" categorization of people. He should not be punished for holding and expressing a consistent opinion that applies across many categories. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:01, 12 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Merge the gendered-ethnicity-nationality-descent combinations and keep the others. Sources routinely describe scientists by their family's country of origin, see here, here, here, here, and here for just a few of the many sources. Looking over the sources, I am convinced that articles on Chinese-American, Indian-American, and other Asian diasporas in science can be written.-- User:Namiba 21:55, 12 January 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:Operations Near Cache River, Arkansas

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) 23:05, 11 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Merge as WP:SMALLCAT, as there is only one article in each of these. These are sub-cats within "Campaigns" categories, but a single page about a battle does not deserve a Campaign category. – Fayenatic London 08:09, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Merge, very obvious cases of WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:33, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Obviously merge -- These are single article categories where the article does not need much more in the way of categories. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:25, 10 January 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:Fictional LGBT characters by occupation

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; Category:LGBT villains and Category:LGBT superheroes moved to Category:Fictional LGBT characters. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:03, 11 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEF. It could be argued that the two categories inside of this category, superheroes and villains, are not occupations, merely lifestyles of the character. – DarkGlow ( ✉) 02:29, 4 January 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:Education missionaries

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 as nominated, primarily because Category:Missionary educators was not nominated. I will redirect Category:Education missionaries to Category:Missionary educators. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:31, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Seems to duplicate Category:Missionary educators unless I'm missing something? Le Deluge ( talk) 01:14, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Merge or reverse merge per nom. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:11, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Merge per nom These are missionaries who engage in education. They are missionaries because of their specific connection to a specific religion. The target is the order that represents who and what these people actually are. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 13:49, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Reverse Merge more logical. Not all education missionaries who support education are educators but all missionary educators are working as education missionaries. An education missionary category would include someone who builds schools but does not teach or lead teachers. They are not an educator. Education missionaries is more accurate and inclusive of the two. Breamk ( talk) 14:12, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Merge somehow -- Reverse merge for preference as they were probably primarily missionaries, though they fulfilled that role through teaching. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:30, 10 January 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 Royal Order of the Engabu

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) 23:02, 11 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING ( WP:OCAWARD & WP:SMALLCAT)
The Royal Order of the Engabu was established in 2010 by the Bunyoro kingdom within Uganda. The only article in the category, Muedzul Lail Tan Kiram, is a local royal from the Philippines with no clear connection to Uganda or Africa in general so I'm not sure why he received it. I don't know if I can say the category is "listified" since there is only 1 article but it is now linked here in the main article. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 00:08, 4 January 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:Honorary graduates of Keele University

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) 23:01, 11 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING ( WP:OCAWARD and WP:SMALLCAT)
The only article in this category is Neil Baldwin (Keele University), a person with learning disabilities who was "adopted by the student body over the last 50 years as something of a mascot for Keele". Mr. Baldwin is definitely defined by his association with the school and received other awards like an honorary membership into the student body and a testimonial match, but these honours don't seem individually defining. There is no 2nd person with learning disabilities who became a Keele school mascot so this category has no growth potential, unless we add people who received honorary degrees for donating money which we've consistently found non-defining. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 00:08, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Background We've previously deleted the other categories for honorary degree recipients, including here, here and here, but this was just created last month. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 00:08, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per WP:NONDEF and per precedent. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:18, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per WP:NONDEF. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:18, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete This is not defining. Do not merge it. Some of these people get the award just because they are a speaker at commencement. Thus in their entire lives they are connected with the university for one day. This is not a connection that is defining. To give some examples I know well, Barack Obama was giving an honorary award when he spoke at commencement for the University of Notre Dame this was a huge controversy at U of ND because Obama supports the legal killing of unborn children through all 9 months of pregnancy for any reason, a very different position that that of the Church that sponsors Notre Dame. In the grand scheme of things this incident and its aftermath may be defining to Notre Dame, and probably at least worth mentioning in the article on that institution, it is not big enough to be defining to Obama. Another case, Thomas S. Monson spoke at commencement at Southern Utah University, this is not at all defining to Monson. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 13:53, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete , as receiving a honorary degree is not defining. Neil Baldwin (Keele University) is already in Category:People associated with Keele University because of his specific association to the university as a mascot, not because of the honorary degree. Place Clichy ( talk) 14:08, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete -- Having an honorary degree is generally not defining. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:32, 10 January 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_January_4&oldid=1001316835"