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: merge per
WP:SMALLCAT, we currently have one single establishment in the Cape Colony not only in the year 1652 (as in the nominated category) but rather in the whole 17th century. So we have here a total of 8 categories to host no less than 1 article.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:20, 11 September 2015 (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:Arab socialist politicians
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.
Keep but purge any non-socialists into the nationalist category. Most of the parties have socialist in their name and the Ba'ath party was Arab socialist too. They may not have many articles but a good many subcats, so that they are potentially useful as container cats.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:17, 12 September 2015 (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:Shaun King race debate
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.
Delete - Per
WP:COP, categorization of people should be of defining characteristics. I don't think this flash-in-the-pan, briefly-newsworthy-but-quickly-discredited fringe claim about a living person is a "defining characteristic" of any living person. There's no foreseeable potential for growth of the category either, because the issue has entirely disappeared from reliable sources.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk)
17:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete -- Most of this is about people and organisations that contributed to a rather NN debate; that would make it a performance category, which we do not allow. Most Black Americans (and West Indians) have mixed-race descent anyway.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:23, 12 September 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - not a defining characteristic for any of the individuals or organizations currently in this category, and this "race debate" doesn't seem notable enough to warrant a category. --
BoboMeowCat (
talk)
22:50, 14 September 2015 (UTC)reply
Comment The race controversy is mentioned briefly in the Shaun King article. Is there enough material for expanding it? This is a minor controversy and in no need of a category, but could perhaps be mentioned in the articles of the people involved.
Dimadick (
talk)
14:07, 15 September 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete. We can argue about how much attention this deserves in the relevant articles, but devoting a category to it is obviously ridiculous. --
Aquillion (
talk)
21:45, 15 September 2015 (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:Neo-Shu'ubiyya nationalisms
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:Abandoned military aircraft projects of France
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:Architects from Sicily
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:Delete. I've recategorised 2 articles which had this with the standard
Category:Sicilian architects; this category is now empty, and has no links (was this hasty/incorrect process -- please let me know if it should have been cfm-ed instead with no recategorisation)
Hydronium Hydroxide (
talk)
14:31, 11 September 2015 (UTC)reply
Comment Just letting you know but when nominating a category for deletion, you're not supposed to recategorize any of its entries.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof?15:51, 11 September 2015 (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:Dutch Golden Age
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.
Rename Not only does what makes something a "Golden" age involve lots of assessment, but its parameters, even if the term itself is agreed on by historians, will be difficult to fix. A century is easily fixed, and while arguably a arbitrary division, is the easist to standardize over large parts of time. Beyond that people regularly speak of different centuries as if they are clearly distinct, referencing the 21st-century, 20th-century and 19th-century quite often.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
16:41, 19 September 2015 (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:Wikipedians who contribute to the Indonesia Wikipedia
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:LGBT places
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: For the same reasons whereby Wikipedia consensus has insisted on categorizing films as
Category:LGBT-related films rather than "LGBT films", magazines as
Category:LGBT-related magazines rather than "LGBT magazines", and on and so forth, this needs to be renamed — the current naming implies, wrongly, that the places have an inherent sexual orientation or gender identity of their own, rather than simply being associated with people who have sexual orientations or gender identities. The places are LGBT-related, but they don't have sexual or gender identities per se.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:55, 12 August 2015 (UTC)reply
Query - would the same logic mean that "Category:LGBT nightclubs" should be renamed "Category:LGBT-related nightclubs"? Would a rename to something like "Category:Facilities for LGBT people" be better? DexDor(talk)05:19, 13 August 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete and upmerge to
Category:LGBT, not "places". These are various types of places frequented by or catering to a LGBT clientele, the only thing they have in common is their clientele, which is handled in the category to which they should be upmerged. Otherwise we'll be categorizing every place by who goes there, lives there, or is marketed toward.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk)
01:09, 18 August 2015 (UTC)reply
Also add some inclusion criteria to make clear that the category is only for articles about things that exist mainly for LGBT people - e.g. a park/beach etc that is popular with LGBT people but is also used by other people should not be in this category (a list may be appropriate in such a case). DexDor(talk)11:46, 12 September 2015 (UTC)reply
That's exactly one of the things that we're discussing right now. I agree that 'places' is not really appropriate and should be renamed. But it's too early to remove something from the category before we have consensus about it.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
18:53, 16 September 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete This seems to be taking things a step too far. The monuments and memorials make sense, and can be given a higher level parent. The Churches clearly needs to not be in this category, since they are organizations not places. I have doubts about the usefulness of the category itself.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
16:43, 19 September 2015 (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:County Commissioners of Penobscot County, Maine
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:Strawberry sodas
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 the spirit of
WP:C1, an empty category, and
WP:OVERLAPCAT.
Wikipedia doesn't have even a single article about strawberry pop which is a shame, because it's totally delicious. Instead, 21 regional
soft drink bottlers are in this category, most of which are notable for their Root Beer or Orange Soda. If "Strawberry" is listed under "Other Flavors" in the article, it's in this category. Categorizing companies by every single product they make isn't defining:
Hosmer Soda makes 35 flavors of while
Nehi makes 40. Take a look at the bottom of those articles to see how this is creating category clutter.
RevelationDirect (
talk)
00:00, 11 September 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete – this would be a splendid category if it were populated by articles on strawberry sodas but it isn't.
Welch's is a company, not a soft drink of any sort. I can't see any article which is about a strawberry soda.
Oculi (
talk)
15:58, 11 September 2015 (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.