- 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) 05:15, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale:
WP:OVERCATEGORIZATION.
WP:NON-DEFINING trait. Also
WP:OPINIONCAT. –
Muboshgu (
talk)
23:37, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Is a defining trait of most of the members and potential members. — Mr. Guye ( talk) ( contribs) 23:41, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- How is this a "defining trait" of Hillary Clinton, a former FLOTUS, Senator, Sec State, and presidential nominee? Or Aradhna Tripati, a climate scientist? They're not notable for opposing Trump. – Muboshgu ( talk) 23:47, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. Not a defining trait. Neutrality talk 00:07, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. It would be an absolute nightmare to have an entire class of "People critical of foo politician" categories. This one (much like a hypothetical "People critical of Barack Obama" category) would by its very nature effectively contain almost every federal elected official of the opposing party, and thousands of other notable people who have voiced an opinion on the matter. bd2412 T 00:40, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
- obvious delete what bd2412 said. Mangoe ( talk) 02:08, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - Non-defining, unencyclopedic and simply silly. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 02:47, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - This is a non-defining, overspecific, silly category. What next, "People who hate broccoli"? FireflySixtySeven ( talk) 11:47, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Useless category. Category:Opposition to Donald Trump previously deleted. LM2000 ( talk) 12:01, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - There are thousands upon thousands of people who are critical of Trump in one way or another. The category is too hard to define. Plus we already have this article which is probably more useful. Cooltrainer Hugh ( talk) 15:40, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
- 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.
- Comment This category name is even worse than some of the above commentators imagined. Some of the people "critical" of President Trump will be people who voted for him, and who support some of his policies, but as long as they criticize his actions on any particular issue, they will count as being critical of him. Also, since categories are permanent, people who have criticized him at any people would belong, even if they came to different views later. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 04:14, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- 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) 05:22, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Only three articles in the category and currently is not likely to grow. It can always be recreated if more members of the family become notable. JDDJS ( talk) 18:28, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete The few notable family members can fit in the main cat. If this is kept it should be renamed to Category:Family of Stephen Colbert, unless we're going to include the likes of Claudette Colbert. LM2000 ( talk) 00:03, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete -- We do not allow categories by shared surname. If we were going to have a category with this name, I would expect it to relate to Louis XIV's minister.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:29, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment While Jean-Baptiste Colbert purchased a barony, his ancestors were obscure merchants. Dimadick ( talk) 06:47, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
- 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:
Relisted at
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 September 3#Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth.
ℯ
xplicit
00:55, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
- Propose merging Category:Polish-Lithuanian society to Category:Social history of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth
- Propose renaming
mergingCategory:Social history of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to Category:Social history of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth - Propose merging Category:Polish-Lithuanian culture to Category:Cultural history of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth
- Propose renaming
mergingCategory:Cultural history of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to Category:Cultural history of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth - Propose merging Category:History of religion in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to Category:Religion in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth (or reverse merge)
- Nominator's rationale: merge pairwise with each other as duplicates. Everything in a former country is history so it is not meaningful to create a topic parent category on top of a topic history category for every topic. Besides "Polish-Lithuanian" is not very precise, it should definitely refer to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The minor issue with - and – could have been solved speedily ( WP:C2C per Category:Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth), but for the sake of merging this had to be a full nomination anyway. Marcocapelle ( talk) 17:48, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- comment we cannot merge to categories that do not exist. Hmains ( talk) 02:54, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
- I've changed merging into renaming if that helps. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:12, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
- 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: rename. ℯ xplicit 00:55, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: C2C. Trivialist ( talk) 17:42, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- Comment. It makes sense to align the format of the categories but WP:C2C does not currently apply yet. The sibling categories use a mix of the two formats, e.g. we also have Category:Companies by city in the United States and Category:Parks by city in the United States. Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:50, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
- Support now it has been raised at CfD. It will match Category:Festivals by country and city if renamed. Sionk ( talk) 13:16, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- 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: merge ( non-admin closure). Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:25, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Single-entry WP:SMALLCAT for one mayor, with little prospect of expansion as South Charleston is not large enough to hand its mayors an automatic WP:NPOL pass just for being mayors. As always, every place does not automatically get one of these the moment there's one mayor to categorize -- it's warranted if there are four or five or six past or present mayors with articles, but if there's just one then it stays in the parent categories. Bearcat ( talk) 17:05, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 19:40, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- 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: soft delete ( non-admin closure). Marcocapelle ( talk) 03:09, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: The studio for which the category was based on, was declared non-notable. This category is unnecessary as there are very few articles that can fit and the studio itself has been shut down. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 20:22, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:21, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle ( talk) 05:21, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- 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: rename ( non-admin closure). Marcocapelle ( talk) 06:07, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Nominator's rationale: Correct naming format for categories of this type.
Bearcat (
talk)
01:33, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- Support Makes sense to me as the Category's creator. Juno ( talk) 20:01, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
- Rename per nom The main article is Democratic Party (United States) and categories should follow its lead. Dimadick ( talk) 06:49, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
- 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.