Category:Woman soldier and warrior characters in video games
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.
Nominator's rationale: Per all of its parent categories, and the fact that not all fictional characters are human women.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ) 21:28, 1 May 2023 (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:Beaches of Vermont
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.
Nominator's rationale: Category of dubious utility. The only contents here are a unified list of beaches in New England as a whole and a Vermont-specific redirect to Vermont's subsection of that same other list -- and even that list doesn't actually contain any articles about beaches that could be filed here, but just contains links to the parks that some beaches in Vermont happen to be located in. So obviously no prejudice against recreation in the future if and when some beaches in Vermont actually have their own articles to file in it, but a category just to hold one list and a redirect to that same list is not aiding navigation of the pedia at all.
Bearcat (
talk) 18:03, 1 May 2023 (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:Shingon Sect Chisan School Temples
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.
Nominator's rationale: Badly named category whose only content is the Naritasan subcategory that's been listed for deletion below, which also makes it a
WP:SMALLCAT. I don't know enough about the subject area to know whether it's salvageable with other content or not, so I'm willing to withdraw this if it can be, but even if it is salvageable it would still have to be renamed for consistency with
Wikipedia naming conventions.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:58, 1 May 2023 (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:Temples by Main Deity
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.
Nominator's rationale: Badly-named category. I don't have sufficient knowledge of the subject area to attempt to sort out whether it's legitimate or not, so obviously no prejudice against deletion if consensus leans in that direction, but even if it's justified this name is not consistent with
Wikipedia naming conventions.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:55, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Rename per Pppery's proposal. The scope becomes much clearer with this name.
Dimadick (
talk) 03:55, 8 May 2023 (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:Temples with Fudō Myōō as the Main Deity
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.
Nominator's rationale: Badly-named category. I don't have sufficient knowledge of the subject area to attempt to sort out whether it's legitimate or not, so obviously no prejudice against deletion if consensus leans in that direction, but even if it's justified this name is not consistent with
Wikipedia naming conventions.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:55, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Alt renameCategory:Temples of Fudō Myōō: the format "Temples of ..." is simply a matter of
WP:C2C. Since all these temples are in Japan, it does not seem necessary to change Fudō Myōō (the Japanese name of Acala) to
Acala.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:05, 2 May 2023 (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:Kanto 36 Fudōson Sacred Sites
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.
Nominator's rationale: Badly-named category. I don't have sufficient knowledge of the subject area to attempt to sort out whether it's legitimate or not, so obviously no prejudice against deletion if consensus leans in that direction, but even if it's justified this name is not consistent with
Wikipedia naming conventions.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:54, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
If Fudōson and Fudō Myōō are the same (which I do not know) then presumably this category can be merged into the category discussed immediately above this one.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:45, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
My understanding is that it's a pilgrimage route with that deity as its main deity, but the temples are not individually all dedicated to the deity, so merging the categories would be a mistake.
Delete, two temples are already in the category discussed above and it is not a defining characteristic for the other three articles.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:11, 2 May 2023 (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:Naritasan
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.
Nominator's rationale:eponymous categories for topics without the volume of spinoff content needed to justify eponymous categories. "Naritasan" just contains the eponym and one related subsidiary, but there would have to be five things to be filed here, not just two, before a dedicated category for them was justified -- and meanwhile, "Sangō" just contains the "Naritasan" category with no other content at all, not even a head article to clarify what Sangō even is. It's categorized as "Mountain faith" and "Buddhism in [various countries]", but absolutely nothing listed in the disambiguation page at
Sango offers any insight into that -- and even the Naritasan subcategory's head article
Narita-san doesn't even contain the word "Sango" at all, and therefore sheds absolutely no new light on what the relationship between "Naritasan" and "Sango" would be either. So these just aren't justified categories, if one's too small to be permissible and the other is for a concept that doesn't even have an article to explain what it even is in the first place.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:44, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Update: Other articles started to be added to
Category:Sangō as I was typing this nomination statement out — but it still doesn't contain any article that sheds any light on what Sangō is, as the new contents are entirely a mixture of mountains whose articles still don't contain the word "Sango" and disambiguation pages that shouldn't be in articlespace categories at all.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:47, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
I fixed up some of the entries that do not belong.
Sangō is a kind of Japanese Buddhist temple. Having -san or occasionally -yama at the end of a temple name indicates it is a Sango.
Immanuelle ❤️💚💙
(talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 20:09, 1 May 2023 (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:Mat Dickie
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.
Nominator's rationale:Eponymous category for a person without the volume of spinoff content needed to justify an eponymous category. The only contents here are the subject's own
WP:BLP and one video game he designed, but searching his What links here doesn't suggest that any of his other games have articles to file here -- and even if they did, categorizing them this way would come close enough to the edges of
WP:PERFCAT that it would probably still warrant a CFD discussion anyway. But regardless, it might be acceptable if there were five or ten things to file alongside the eponym, but it isn't needed for just one.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:29, 1 May 2023 (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:Davis & Elkins Senators football seasons
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.
Nominator's rationale:WP:SMALLCAT which currently exists solely to hold one redirect to a section within a wider "league season" article; the only other thing that was filed here at all was a draft, which had to be removed as drafts aren't allowed to mingle with articles in mainspace categories. Obviously no prejudice against recreation if and when four or five of this team's seasons have their own standalone articles to file in it, but it's not needed just to hold one redirect.
Bearcat (
talk) 16:38, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
The basis for the creation of categories is not "enough content to properly populate them may exist in the future" — the basis for the creation of categories is "at least five appropriate articles already exist to be filed in the category now". The content has to exist first, and then the category to group them together comes second, not vice versa.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:16, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
the basis for the creation of categories is "at least five appropriate articles already exist to be filed in the category now" – unlesssuch categories are part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme ... [or it] does have realistic potential for growth, both of which apply here.
BeanieFan11 (
talk) 01:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep. I read at SMALLCAT: Avoid categories that, by their very definition, will never have more than a few members, unless such categories are part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme ... a category which does have realistic potential for growth ... may be kept even if only a small number of its articles actually exist at the present time. (emphasis added) – Firstly, there is a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme for creating categories for college football seasons when they exist and secondly, the category does have a realistic potential for growth – the team played from (it seems) 1904 to 1961 and many of their seasons have the potential for notability – so it should be kept.
BeanieFan11 (
talk) 21:13, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Clearly there were a lot of seasons, the question is really if each year individually notable and sourcable enough to create a separate article (not just a redirect). I'm thinking no, but am open to being corrected. -
RevelationDirect (
talk) 02:43, 7 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Considering how much coverage the 1923 season received, I'm sure there's a bunch of other notable seasons (not to mention that if there are non-notable ones, they can always be merged into an article on a group of years, e.g. Davis & Elkins Senators football, 1930–1934). However, even if there's no other notable ones, the category still qualifies to be retained per the clause of SMALLCAT that states Avoid categories that, by their very definition, will never have more than a few members, unless such categories are part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme (emphasis added) – there is a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme for college football seasons. Deleting/merging season cats even when season articles exist would be unprecedented here.
BeanieFan11 (
talk) 01:04, 8 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete for now, it is unclear whether articles about other seasons will appear, and when/if they do it is easy enough to recreate the category.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep Regardless of whether articles on other seasons are eventually created, this is part of an established categorization scheme; see
Category:College football seasons by team, which has many other small subcategories. Without these categories, it's harder to find which smaller schools have articles on their notable seasons.
TheCatalyst31Reaction•
Creation 04:00, 8 May 2023 (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:John Marshall Law School (Chicago) alumni
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 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:National weightlifting championships
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.
Nominator's rationale: The category doesn't seem to serve its purpose as the only 2 articles are "List of US champions", no articles about championships.
Pelmeen10 (
talk) 12:54, 1 May 2023 (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:1987 wildfires
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.
Nominator's rationale: Consistency with previous discussions. Only 2 articles. The tree doesn't start until 2000. The other parents are not needed as merge targets since they are already in there. –
Aidan721 (
talk) 12:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Did not realize that
Category:1987 meteorology was not part of the category header template. Have adjusted nom accordingly. –
Aidan721 (
talk) 20:29, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Why do we not have for X-Men as a whole franchise for charters pages, future games, future movies and anything else
Fan Of Lion King 🦁 (
talk) 09:08, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Because the contents of the category are not that.
Gonnym (
talk) 12:03, 2 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment the X-Men film series is extinct, this draft category should be able to be deleted, as Deadpool is migrating to the MCU, and all other film articles have already been created; future X-Men films are also to be in the MCU --
64.229.90.172 (
talk) 06:36, 3 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose and Delete: Given this category only has one article in it and there are three other drafts for X-Men content that are not of the film series, I don't see the need for either this or an X-Men as a whole drafts cat when they are easily covered by
Category:Marvel Comics drafts, which those cats should be part of (and some already are) and the fact that the X-Men film series is over. We don't need a drafts cat for everything in existence when a more collective grouping already exists.
Trailblazer101 (
talk) 00:39, 4 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Support There are more X-Men drafts so it makes sense.
★Trekker (
talk) 13:38, 7 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment Well, the Dreams End draft was G'13d, which would leave the Wolverine game, X-Men '97, and Deadpool film series as the sole three drafts in a cat, which seems rather unnecessary specification when most are already in the Marvel drafts cat, and eventually, the first two will release, leaving only the DP series one that is covered elsewhere.
Trailblazer101 (
talk) 04:20, 14 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Fair. But I think its good to keep in mind that draft categories are by their very nature dynamic, there is a decent chance that more X-Men drafts will be made. But I guess on the other hand one can argue that the general Marvel Entertainment drafts category already does a good job of collecting those when they come.
★Trekker (
talk) 00:11, 29 May 2023 (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.
Template for Sonic the Hedgehog drafts
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.
✗plicit 03:47, 19 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Why do we not have for Sonic as a whole franchise for charters pages, future games, future movies and anything else
Fan Of Lion King 🦁 (
talk) 08:59, 1 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Because the contents of the category are not that.
Gonnym (
talk) 12:03, 2 May 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't see how that is correct, all the drafts are still about Sonic.
★Trekker (
talk) 13:38, 7 May 2023 (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.
Templates for railway lines of Belgium
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 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:University of California, Hastings College of the Law alumni and others
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.
Courcelles (
talk) 17:39, 8 May 2023 (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:Mahamevnawa Buddhist Monastery
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 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.
Various emigrants
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.
IN principle merge but we need to be careful that we do not upmerge cases where there are several articles.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:31, 7 May 2023 (UTC)reply
I have amended the nom to use {{clc}}, which appends the number of articles in the category, to allay Peterkingiron's concerns, and in case anyone has added any articles since the nom was made (all are still 1 or 2).
Oculi (
talk) 01:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose, I'm not seeing the value in upmerging the categories.--
Ortizesp (
talk) 02:14, 8 May 2023 (UTC)reply
WP:NARROWCAT suggests that by default, intersection categories should not exist. We need a good reason to keep them around; we don't need a good reason to delete them.
jlwoodwa (
talk) 05:52, 9 June 2023 (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.