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 ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:35, 2 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Propose deleting Category:Fictional Mahdist War veterans ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:01, 24 September 2021 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom and WP:SMALLCAT. Obviously created by a Dad's Army fan. No Great Shaker ( talk) 08:16, 25 September 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.

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. ✗ plicit 13:21, 22 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:Courses to Category:Wikipedia Education Program courses

Nominator's rationale: This category name doesn't sufficiently indicate that it's not a content category. (It also seems essentially unused?) {{u| Sdkb}}  ^talk 17:47, 24 September 2021 (UTC) reply

• Delete or selectively merge to parent Category:Wikipedia Education Program course pages, this is a hogdepodge, half of the entries are sandbox pages. If any of the entries belongs in Category:Wikipedia Education Program course pages then let us move it there, but frankly I doubt so. Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Adds no value and serves no useful purpose. No Great Shaker ( talk) 08:22, 25 September 2021 (UTC) reply
• Delete there is nothing worth keeping. If there were, a rename would be necessary. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 05:02, 15 October 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.

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. ✗ plicit 13:22, 22 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Propose renaming Category:COVID-19 conspiracy theorists to Category:COVID-19 denialists

Nominator's rationale: "Conspiracy theorists" is a problematic term as it is a loaded and narrow label. Many noted commentators who are substantially known for denial of COVID or its prevention (anti-mask, anti-vaxx) cannot be included in this category because their views are not technically considered to be "conspiracy theories" by other editors. Examples include Bob Enyart and Peter Hitchens.

Possible category names could include COVID-19 denialists (in-line with Category:HIV/AIDS denialists) COVID-19 skeptics, or critics of COVID-19 response. Alternatively, this category could be retained for its existing narrow scope and a wider parent category created to cover the skeptics. Cnbrb ( talk) 12:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC) reply

• Oppose but a better name is needed. "Denialists" won't do, because conspiracy theorists also include others, such as people who believe that Covid-19 exists but that it was deliberately released, for example. I agree that the current name is not ideal, however. Grutness... wha? 15:53, 24 September 2021 (UTC) reply
• Comment: For reference, this category was previously nominated for deletion, with a result of no consensus to delete. Some "denialist" categories have been kept (e.g. Category:Holocaust deniers), and Category:HIV/AIDS denialists) while others such as "climate change denialists" have been repeatedly deleted (see discussions here, here, here, and a BLP discussion here). If this category is renamed, it will likely warrant a narrower (and clearly defined) scope, and thus selective purging (the scope should be clearly defined even without a rename, as the previous deletion discussion raised many issues of careless/partisan/kneejerk labelling driven by recentism and personal opinions). Relevant policies and guidelines include WP:BLPCAT, WP:OPINIONCAT, WP:POVCAT, WP:COPDEF, and MOS:LABEL. --Animalparty! ( talk) 01:05, 25 September 2021 (UTC) reply
• Comment yes I agree the scope would have to be very clearly defined, centred on WP:DEFINING and tempered by recentism, and unavoidably there will be some grey areas/borderline cases. Cnbrb ( talk) 08:28, 25 September 2021 (UTC) reply
• Oppose per Grutness. Rename to Category:Critics of COVID-19 response might be okay. — Lights and freedom ( talk ~ contribs) 01:26, 27 September 2021 (UTC) reply
• Oppose, the current name suffices. Anti-mask and anti-vaxx are an issue of WP:OPINIONCAT and too widespread to categorize by, while complete denial of Covid-19 can be counted among conspiracy theories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:48, 27 September 2021 (UTC) reply
• Oppose The current name pretty much describes these people. Hmains ( talk) 16:36, 2 October 2021 (UTC) reply