From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 12 May 14 >

May 13

Category:Jharkhand MLAs 2010–2014

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) 02:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: 1) Not a valid range, and 2) hinders category navigation on all cats surrounding the redirect target, Category:Jharkhand MLAs 2009–2014.   ~  Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf)  22:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • If deleted, the older page history should be merged into 2009–2014, without leaving a redirect this time. Note: a swift close would assist the nominator in his excellent with on nav templates. – Fayenatic London 15:55, 14 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:16th-century Flemish people 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: no consensus. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:29, 16 June 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Flemish was not a nationality Rathfelder ( talk) 21:45, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support per nom. This needs to be expanded to sibling and child categories though. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:34, 14 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose. Sources nearly always discuss these as "Flemish" people, e.g. Flemish painters. Whatever happens, please don't expand this to Flemish artists, as this is the generally accepted term ("Flemish painters" and the like, never "Habsburg Netherlands painters"). Fram ( talk) 07:27, 14 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • The sibling and child categories are not about artists though. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:38, 14 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Okay, that's one concern less. However, e.g. Andreas Vesalius is in this category tree, and he is commonly referred to as "Flemish" [1] [2], as were the others in that category like Dodoens [3] or in other subcategories like Anna Bijns [4]. Fram ( talk) 08:50, 14 May 2021 (UTC) reply
This is part of an exercise to sort out the confusions in Belgian/Flemish categories before 1830. Further ideas are welcome. Rathfelder ( talk) 22:14, 15 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Not sure whether we are really going to sort out what "Flemish" means in this period. Dependent on context, it could mean just from the county of Flanders, or also from the duchy of Brabant, or from the entire Southern Netherlands including the Prince-Bishopric of Liege. I have the impression that the latter applies to "Flemish artists" but I am not sure. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Well, luckily we don't have to sort this out, we can go with what reliable sources use of course. If they discuss these people as being "Flemish", then it is perfectly appropriate to have a category for this and to put them in there. Fram ( talk) 07:50, 18 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep for now -- Flemish strictly refers to natives of Flanders, but it widely used to refer to the Flemish (aka Dutch) speaking region of Belgium, as opposed to the Walloon (French-speaking) region. While I support having a "Hapsburg Netherlands" (rather than a Belgian) parent, I do not think we should be merging Flemish into Netherlands as a matter of course. What a person's native language is constitutes a very important characteristic. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Categorizing Early Modern people by the language that they spoke will become an OR nightmare. Note that even the County of Flanders (originally much bigger than the current two Belgian provinces) had French-speaking areas. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:25, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • "Flemish" is clearly an ambiguous and contested term, which really makes it unsuitable for categorisation, but I dont think it is a battle we should fight. It is certainly used a lot for painters, and that seems to be fairly clear. But I think we need to avoid giving the impression that it was a nationality, and so put people in nationality categories as well as Flemish, especially if its not very clear what is meant by Flemish as far as that article is concerned. Rathfelder ( talk) 21:27, 19 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Merge Flemish did not mean what it means today at the time. We should categorize people by the largest coherent applicable grouping at the time, and the target is that. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 12:35, 2 June 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.

Anglican bishops in Ghana

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) 02:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Propose renaming Category:Bishops of Accra to Category:Anglican bishops of Accra
Rationale - both the Anglican and Roman Catholic churches have many dioceses in Ghana and there is a considerable overlap in the names (eg there are Category:Roman Catholic bishops of Ho, Category:Roman Catholic bishops of Cape Coast, Category:Roman Catholic bishops of Koforidua, Category:Roman Catholic bishops of Tamale). Moreover the corresponding dioceses are all of the form Anglican Diocese of Kumasi; see Category:Anglican dioceses in Ghana. Oculi ( talk) 20:24, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support all these. Rathfelder ( talk) 21:06, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support all. ArvindPalaskar ( talk) 11:20, 15 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support but only where there is actual conflict of names. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support all, not just with a conflict of names, for consistency. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support - per above. The confusion between Anglican and Catholic bishops, who often are based in the same city, has been a minor but reoccurring problem. Inter&anthro ( talk) 00:36, 18 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:Field hockey clubs in Poland

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) 02:37, 21 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Merge Category:Field hockey clubs in Poland‎ to Category:Polish field hockey clubs Abcmaxx ( talk) 18:16, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply

  • Support, the categories have the same purpose. The category was not tagged yet, I have done that now. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:19, 14 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:Refugees by name

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) 02:36, 21 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: merge, we usually do not have "by name" categories for biographies. Marcocapelle ( talk) 16:47, 13 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:People from the Southern Netherlands

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 first one. The second one is covered in another discussion below. – Fayenatic London 10:39, 15 June 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: 1713-1795 the area was called the Austrian Netherlands. Rathfelder ( talk) 13:39, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support for consistency. The category tree might have been called Southern Netherlands instead, and could have included some non-Austrian parts that were more or less Austrian protectorates, but that is not the case now. Marcocapelle ( talk) 13:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • If we do Habsburg Netherlands, Spanish Netherlands and Austrian Netherlands effectively we get categories by century. Rathfelder ( talk) 16:41, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Renaming to Southern Netherlands people (before 1830) is perhaps an option. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:40, 14 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • That is a fair point, Habsburg, Spanish and Austrian Netherlands categories can still be have a Belgian category as their parent. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:31, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
All the occupational categories will be under a Belgian category. Rathfelder ( talk) 08:04, 19 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:Artists from the Southern Netherlands

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/rename using "from" for artists, as this avoids ambiguity between the person's origin and the subject depicted. The first line therefore becomes Category:Artists from the Spanish Netherlands. – Fayenatic London 10:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Southern Netherlands was never a country in its own right. We dont have any other categories of People from the Southern Netherlands, and its hard to see this as creating anything other than confusion. Rathfelder ( talk) 13:36, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Complicated, the subcategories (most particularly Category:Flemish artists (before 1830)) may contain articles from the periods of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, Austrian (Habsburg) Netherlands, Spanish (Habsburg) Netherlands, Burgundian Netherlands and pre-Burgundian counties and duchies. The proposal is most probably too simple. A very broad alternative is, let us look for every subcategory separately where it belongs best, and in the end when everything has fallen in place let us delete the nominated category. Marcocapelle ( talk) 14:01, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Agree we shouldnt rush this. I will do what I can, which may involve emptying some categories, and would appreciate advice and assistance from people who understand the historical geography better than I do - though I did make a fact-finding trip to Baarle-Hertog. Rathfelder ( talk) 14:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Alt would prefer "from". They are not intrinsically "of". Laurel Lodged ( talk) 14:41, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • I thought "of" indicated a country category, and "from" was used for towns and cities? Rathfelder ( talk) 14:08, 15 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:Television series in Georgia (country)

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:Georgia (country) television series‎. @ Gonnym: you may now wish to address the sub-cats; the current decade categories seem to be aired-in-decade rather than the usual debut-in-decade. – Fayenatic London 20:44, 16 June 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: The current naming convention of Category:Television series by country is "Fooian television series" with this entry being the only one using a different style. This should either be Category:Georgia (country) television series‎ or Category:Georgian (country) television series‎ Gonnym ( talk) 18:00, 5 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle ( talk) 13:23, 13 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.

pre-1917 establishments in Latvia

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. ✗ plicit 06:39, 4 June 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.

People of Jewish descent by religion

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) 04:13, 3 June 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: delete as it is usually irrelevant when someone of a certain religion has (a few) ancestors of another religion. There are exceptions when it is relevant, for example with the Conversos in Spain who in the 16th century were not trusted to have truly converted from Judaism to Christianity. But a situation like that does not apply to the nominated categories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 12:05, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Manually delete -- If a Jew has converted to Hinduism, he should be in a convert category, not a descent category. If the convert was a parent (or remoter ancestor) the descent category is quite possibly irrelevant.
  • Agree, if people converted themselves they should be in a convert category. But I assume that this is already the case so that manual action is not needed. Marcocapelle ( talk) 18:15, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete These caregories are out of touch with the reality of Jewish life, at least in America, since 1970. The rates of marriage between Jews and non-Jews since that date and various other factors means that for large numbers of people born in the US since 1980 who have Jewish ancestry this is a trivial detail. Arguably this applies to other areas and places. The Nazis even had a hard time defining Jewishness because their theories on it being an inmutalbe and distinct racial group did not mesh with the lived reality of Jewishness in mid-20th century Germany. Yes, Jewishness is an ethno-religious group, but it is not a true and effective racial designation, and so this does not work. Beyond this, these categories are effectively classyfying people by race. We are not demanding any sign of ethnic Jewishness, mere known ancestry. If we had Category:Christian people of Jewish descent or even Cateogry:Latter-day Saint people of Jewish descent some would try to put Hugh W. Nibley in the category. He does not belong in such a category at all. Yes, at some level even he probably knew that his great-grandfather Alexander Niebaur was born Jewish. Nibley donated Niubaur's jornal to the Archives of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and seems to have read it throughly before that. However based on both his mother's public and private statements, and the rhetoric Nibley engaged in where he always wrote in a way that implied that he was completely and throughly of Anglo-American descent, Nibley was in no way ethnically Jewish, did not conceive of himself of publicly claim Jewish ancestry, and so if we are going to categorize by ethnicity he would never belong in such a category. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 20:01, 27 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:Medieval Flemish astronomers

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) 02:31, 16 June 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: delete as anachronistic. While Flemish nowadays means Dutch-speaking Belgian, in the Middle Ages Flemish was simply someone from the county of Flanders (for whom we already have Category:People from the county of Flanders). There is no need to merge, both articles are already in an astronomer-by-century subcategory and in either a county of Flanders or a duchy of Brabant subcategory. Marcocapelle ( talk) 11:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Agree. Quite a lot of Medieval Flemish categories need attention. Rathfelder ( talk) 12:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Not convinced that it's an anachronism (Flemish people still means people from Flanders, as opposed to Flemish-speaking people), but I agree that it's confusing and could go. Grutness... wha? 03:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Keep for now -- We need to deal with such categories systematically, not piecemeal. For the medieval period, the intersection of Dutch/Flemish speaking and occupation would provide a viable category. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:53, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Categorizing Early Modern people by the language that they spoke will become an OR nightmare. In the Middle Ages it will be even worse. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:34, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Dupport the category is unsing the term in an unacceptably anachronistic way. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 12:37, 2 June 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:12th-century Roman Catholic bishops in Flanders

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: renamed; no consensus to merge. This close is no bar to a re-nomination, as this CFD looks rather confusing, and the nomination does not give a rationale for merging. – Fayenatic London 20:37, 16 June 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: rename and re-parent per actual category content. All 8 articles are about prince-bishops of Liege, so Flanders is quite a stretch. The category should also be re-parented to Category:Prince-Bishops of Liège instead of the current Flemish parent. Marcocapelle ( talk) 10:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Very happy with this. As author shall I propose it be done speedily? Rathfelder ( talk) 12:45, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • I processed the speedy rename, but have not closed this yet because Category:Prince-bishops in the Holy Roman Empire has no other century sub-cats. This one contains 8 pages, a decent size; is that sufficient reason not to merge it to both parents? – Fayenatic London 16:01, 14 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • I do not oppose merging, for the sake of consistency in the current category structure. Marcocapelle ( talk) 21:32, 14 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Leave as it now is -- This is an appropriate outcome since the bishops were princes of HRE, not subjects of Burgundy. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • I think this is a mistake. Nobody argues they were subjects of Burgundy, not the least because the expansion of Burgundy took place some 200 years later than this category is about. The question is just whether HRE century categories should be diffused by bishopric. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:42, 16 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:Microaggression theory

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 (selectively as suggested). Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:15, 3 June 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: selectively merge for three reasons, there is no article Microaggression theory (it is a redirect), it is a borderline SMALLCAT, and there is little coherence in the content of the category. Suggestion is to move two articles Microaggression and Micro-inequity to Category:Discrimination, then delete the category. The other two articles are already abundantly categorized, e.g. in Category:Xenophobia and Category:Racism in the United States. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:26, 13 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:18th-century Belgian people

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 and redirect, as the target category already exists. – Fayenatic London 07:12, 15 June 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Belgium did not exist until 1830. Rathfelder ( talk) 07:27, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support per nom as anachronistic. Though probably, after renaming, a few articles may need to be moved from Austrian Netherlands to Holy Roman Empire. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:49, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Rename we need to stop these anachronistic categories. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 12:20, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Although I agree with John Pack Lambert its easier said than done, and in some ways is impractical. Category:People from Antwerp, for example, is quite properly in Category:People by populated place in Belgium, and I dont really think it is sensible to put it into Austrian Netherlands, Spanish Netherlands and Hapsburg Netherlands categories. So I am looking at categories which in themselves are anachronistic. I think Belgium may be less controversial than the UK. We shouldnt have British categories before 1707. And Germany is even more complicated. Rathfelder ( talk) 12:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Prefer "Hapsburg Netherlands". With some loss of territory and some changes of name, this was continuous polity from 15th century to 1795, then reconstituted in 1830. I do not see why we cannot treat it as continuous. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:58, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • If this is the way forward, it should at least be Habsburg Netherlands instead of Hapsburg. But. While technically the Habsburgs were the rulers throughout the Early Modern period, the problem is that the term Habsburg Netherlands is not actually used in historiography of the 17th and 18th century. The term Habsburg Netherlands mainly refers to the gradual unification period and the short united period of the Low Lands. After the Dutch Republic stabilized as an independent country, the terms Spanish Netherlands and Austrian Netherlands were used. Or Southern Netherlands, but that was a bit broader in geography. Marcocapelle ( talk) 18:16, 16 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • The beauty of the Austrian Netherlands is that it more or less coincided with the 18th-century. Rathfelder ( talk) 22:48, 22 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • As the Oxford English Dictionary puts it: "The name Belgium and related words appear from the 16th cent. in several European languages, including English, as a name for the southern regions of the Low Countries, both historical and contemporary, often in contrast with Batavia". So the word was in use before there was an independent Belgian state, and it is accepted English usage to apply it to "the southern regions of the Low Countries, both historical and contemporary". -- Andreas Philopater ( talk) 13:57, 23 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:Animated films about death

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) 02:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Created by a sockpuppet. An overwhelming majority of these films are not about death and just feature a death. JDDJS ( talk to me • see what I've done) 03:59, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, death is a too common feature of (any kind of) films, it is not meaningful to categorize by it. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:06, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Non-defining for most, if not all, of the films in the category. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 06:37, 13 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:Objects presumed to be related with Adam and Eve

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:23, 21 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Containing only two articles, this is a WP:SMALLCAT. It doesn't fit into any category trees except Category:Adam and Eve, so I suggest upmerging to there. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:48, 13 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:Roman Catholic dioceses in the Pacific

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:26, 21 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: The nominated category is a subcategory of the target. These are mostly overlapping categories. Anything placed in one could legitimately be placed in the other. There is no scheme of the Catholic Church in the Pacific that the nominated category is a part of. It's all within Category:Catholic Church in Oceania. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:36, 13 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:Self-originated denominations in the Latter Day Saint movement

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: This is essentially a "remainders" category for denominations that do not trace their authority to a 19th-century Latter Day Saint leader. With only one article and three redirects, WP:SMALLCAT may also be a consideration. I suggest upmerging. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:22, 13 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:Résumé frauds and controversies

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: selective merge and delete. The suggested Category:People using unaccredited degrees may prove a useful sibling to the current sub-cat Category:People who fabricated academic degrees. – Fayenatic London 11:48, 8 June 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Category is fundamentally overbroad; it is extremely problematic w/r/t WP:BLP to conflate "fraud" (a criminal offense and civil tort) with "controversy" (someone got mad on the Internet). Describing a living person as committing "fraud" absent an admission of fabrication, conviction or finding of civil liability is potentially libelous. Per WP:OPINIONCAT, that someone is merely accused of something is not a defining characteristic. This could possibly be reworked and renamed to include only people who have been convicted, found liable, or admitted to fraud. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 15:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Rename to "Category:Résumé controversies" and consider creating a category for frauds alone for instances in which there have been criminal convictions. It should not be deleted as there are certainly resume controversies. Coretheapple ( talk) 15:27, 20 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • At least purge biographies (possibly after listifying them in Job fraud#Résumé fraud), and add a warning on the category page against adding biographies, in order to avoid BLP issues. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:15, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • This sounds like a reasonable solution. So it is a selective merge and deletion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 12:48, 13 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.

Philosophy of religion literature

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: do not merge, as the opposer's point about WP:SMALLCAT appears valid. However, these are a pointless layer within Category:Philosophy of religion literature; the respective contents are already directly within that category, so I will remove the nominated categories from it. – Fayenatic London 10:48, 8 June 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, only one article per category. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:52, 18 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:11, 13 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:Songs about funk

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) 02:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: These are songs with "funk" in the title. I wouldn't say they are about funk. WP:NOTDEFINING. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Talk to me 02:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. None of the articles I read mentioned 'funk' in the text which then fails WP:SHAREDNAME which reads, Avoid categorizing by a subject's name when it is a non-defining characteristic of the subject, or by characteristics of the name rather than the subject itself... -- Richhoncho ( talk) 05:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom and Richhoncho. JDDJS ( talk to me • see what I've done) 18:36, 13 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:People with insomnia

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) 02:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NOT, WP:COP and WP:NONDEFINING ( WP:TRIVIALCAT)
Chronic insomnia can be a serious medical condition but this tends to come up tangentially in articles. The Button King made buttons when he couldn't sleep, Tallulah Bankhead got hooked on sleeping pills she took for insomnia, while the reason for including Ibn al-Khatib is unclear. These people do not seem defined by this medical condition and Wikipedia is not a medical history of every diseases or ailment of notable people. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 00:37, 13 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:Odd Fellows by nationality

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) 02:29, 21 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:TRIVIALCAT (and WP:C2F for the parent category)
I certainly can't claim WP:SMALLCAT here because the American branch currently has 600,000 members and the British branch was founded in 1798 so there have been many more members total. Maybe King George IV, President Ulysses S. Grant, and Prime Minister Winston Churchill were members but their articles don't even mention it. And, even for articles that do mention, the passing references to multiple organizations seem nondefining for Joseph Braithwaite (mayor), Elijah A. Briggs, and Earl Warren. Simply being a member of a membership organization is not defining.
The parent category only has one eponymous article, Odd Fellows, which is already under Category:Odd Fellowship. In case another editor wants to start a list, I copied the current category contents right here so no work is lost. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 00:37, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Background We deleted similar fraternal club memberships for the Moose, Orange Order, and Knights of Columbus here, here and here. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 00:37, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Just membership of an organization is hardly ever defining. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete membership in an organization like this is not defining. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 12:21, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete -- I am not sure whether it is/was a Friendly Society or merely connected to one, but these functioned as medical and life insurance companies. Membership is non-defining. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:15, 16 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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_May_13&oldid=1073193156"