People who have or had an infectious disease that didn't kill them, at least not yet
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.
We have a categories for people who died from all of these diseases so these are the equivalent categories for people that did not die. One problem here is that many of these diseases are chronic or have significant long-term health implications. The bigger problem is that Wikipedia is not a medical history of every diseases or ailment (even serious ones) notable people contract in their lives. -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
23:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete. Apart from any other consideration there were millions of people who had these diseases who were not diagnosed. In fact most of us are Survivors of infectious diseases
Rathfelder (
talk)
00:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete most -- However Ebola was so deadly that having survived it may be a notable characteristic, so KeepCategory:Ebola survivors.
Pauline Cafferkey is probably notable only for having had the disease, caught while treating victims of it. People who have survived a disease but are left with long-term disabilities as a result might make a useful category.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:48, 7 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete some people are defined by having or surviving a disease, but they are few.
Category:Ebola survivors seems to have a few who are only known for their Ebola work - their having been infected in the course of it probably highlighted their notability. Perhaps a
Category:People of the Ebola epidemic to replace that one, would more carefully describe their notability because according to our biography of
Fatu Kekula, she never got the virus - she survived the epidemic but not the illness.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk)
20:32, 8 February 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:Metropolitan Special Constabulary
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
Metropolitan Special Constabulary is a voluntary auxilary to London's Metropolitan Police and I have no conceptual objection to the category. But the only things in this category are the main article, a well populated subcategory for volunteers, and a 2nd article about a national law that authorized special constables nationwide including in London with no potential for growth that I can anticipate. (If I'm mistaken and we ever get up to 5+ direct articles, no objection to recreating.) All the contents are already well catgorized under the Metro or Special Constabulary cats so no upmerge is needed. -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
23:54, 6 February 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:Films made before the MPAA Production Code
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: This seems like an unnecessary and redundant category. We already have categories like
Category:American films and
Category:Films by year. It makes no sense to have this category when every American film made before 1934 is always going to contain the other two categories I mentioned. For those of you who don't know, the MPAA Production Code was implemented in 1934.
Scorpions13256 (
talk)
22:07, 6 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete There are a lot of things true about films made before 1934: they are not in 3-D, none of them premiered at Cannes Film Festival, and unfortunately they didn't star
Leonardo DiCaprio. None of those attributes are any more or less defining than this category. -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
01:58, 7 February 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:Lokomotiv Yaroslavl plane crash
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 (or rather upmerge). This is a category that only exists so as to have a subcategory. The victims subcat can have the crash article as its main article, which means that this is an unnecessary level.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:34, 7 February 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:Burials at Saint Andrew's Cemetery, Bratislava
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:Subdivisions of the United Kingdom
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: C2C. Nearly duplicate parentage. The usual expectation of "by country" is there aren't countries inside of them ("by country by country"). This complicates the naming of all country categories. Meanwhile,
Countries of the United Kingdom calls them "nations", also country, province, or region.
WP:NPOV: Per
Countries of the United Kingdom, the descriptive name used "can be controversial, with the choice often revealing one's political preferences". Therefore, I'm proposing we distinguish each by the
anodyne formal political geography terms.
The UK doesn't have administrative divisions, it has political divisions. England, Scotland, and Wales have administrative divisions. The Brits came up with this hierarchical nomenclature, now used throughout the English-speaking world. William Allen Simpson (
talk)
14:27, 7 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Support Oculi's alternative, "by country", "by nation" and "political divisions" are confusing, even if technically correct, and the alternative is a very easy way to avoid that.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
15:18, 6 February 2021 (UTC)reply
cmt whatever else is done, we should end up with a sub-category named
Category:United Kingdom by nation or
Category:United Kingdom by constituent nation for the four constituent entities. This is how the UK describes itself ('nations') though not what some independence minded people there call the entities. These four entities are unique and should not just be placed directly into a category with the rest of the admin divisions of the UK
Hmains (
talk)
18:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)reply
I don't see why not. It is Hmains who has created all these unnecessary 'by country' subcat schemes for the UK; eg
Category:British people was perfectly OK with subcats for the 4 sub-nations at the top level until Hmains intervened
in 2020. I doubt whether there would be consensus approval for this.
Oculi (
talk)
20:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)reply
I do not think that a level called by country or by nation is useful for UK categories, and it would also open a can of worms. British categories have been organized for years with head subcategories for the 4 home nations and BOTCD placed at the top of each topic category with a or * or + sortkey. This works fine, there is no reason to change it. Otherwise we see absurdities like the duplicate
Category:British people by country (4 C) next to
Category:People by nationality within the United Kingdom (7 C).
Place Clichy (
talk)
18:47, 12 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Expanded nomination — given that history, I've expanded the nomination to include the subcategories. This should please both Oculi and Hmains, as the Brits came up with this neutral nomenclature. William Allen Simpson (
talk)
14:51, 7 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep -- The sole purpose of this is to make the names longer, which is unnecessary. However I support changing country to nation: we talk of the "four home nations".
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:31, 7 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep or rename all to use administrative divisions. The renaming of the parent
Category:Country subdivisions to
Category:Administrative divisions was done under the argument that this was better English. However fine-mincing political vs. administrative divisions does not seem to be any improvement in terms of navigation among these categories. I prefer to keep consistency with a common title.
Place Clichy (
talk)
18:47, 12 February 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:Abbasid governors of the Jazira
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.
Oppose Mosul was often governed separately from the rest of the Jazira, especially during the later Abbasid period when the Jazira itself was fragmented, and the sources are not always clear when a 'governor of Mosul' was also 'governor of the Jazira'.
Constantine ✍ 08:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Constantine. Same for the preceding Umayyad period—sometimes Mosul was included but often it was a separate province. —
Al Ameer (
talk)
15:15, 6 February 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:Circus strongmen
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: There are several women in the category. Not sure what to rename it though: "Circus strongmen and women"? "Circus strongmen and strongwomen"? "Circus strongpeople"?
Clarityfiend (
talk)
08:01, 6 February 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.
Spanish municipal councillors
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.
Merge for Now While they would have had more than five councillors, most would be non-notable. No objection to recreating any that exceed expectations and get up to 5+ articles. -
RevelationDirect (
talk)
05:32, 7 February 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.
Schools in Sri Lanka by city
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, only 1-3 articles per category. In the first five cases the schools are the only content of the buildings and structures parent category, in those cases a further upmerge to the town "grandparent category" is proposed.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
06:53, 6 February 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:Song recordings produced by The KLF
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.
IHG Hotels & Resorts
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.
Comments, if it was an official name change it should be mentioned and sourced in the article. Besides I do not understand the proposed merge of the brands subcategory, why isn't it a proposal to rename?
Marcocapelle (
talk)
05:41, 6 February 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Marcocapelle: instead of rename, I intent to merge the brands subcategory to the main category, while the IHG people subcategory remain separated. By the way, IHG Hotels & Resorts is now an official corporate brand (not the legal name), so you can check it on www.ihgplc.com.
Ridwan97 (
talk)
13:38, 6 February 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:Lists of astronomical locations in fiction
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.
Support -- While most of the content is in theory an article on the location, in practice they are largely lists of works set in those locations.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
16:25, 7 February 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.