Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 19 March 21 >

March 20

Category:Fandoms a better!

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: has already been deleted Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:46, 21 March 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Pointless category, serving no purpose Nick Moyes ( talk) 23:14, 20 March 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:People involved in anti-Protestantism

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. (There are currently no organizations or events in these categories.) – Fayenatic London 06:49, 24 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Simpler, clearer and more concise. 'People involved in anti-Protestantism' can include victims or scholars of anti-Protestantism as well as its adherents. DrKay ( talk) 22:31, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
The Ku Klux Klan and Know-Nothings were both openly hostile to Catholicism. They claimed no hostility toward individual Catholics, so you have that in reverse.-- User:Namiba 21:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC) reply
I do not think that this hostility was about religious matters, but instead to the population, e.g. Irish and Italians, which they felt was of a lower standard. I'm not sure that this hostility extended to other largely Catholic populations like French Canadians or Germans. It was therefore a proxy for racism and had little to do with religion. Place Clichy ( talk) 07:33, 4 April 2021 (UTC) reply
I am a published historian of the Ku Klux Klan. The Klan claimed problems with the Catholic Church, not Catholic populations. Of course, its actions proved that these issues were inseparable, but this was a core component of the group's rhetoric. The Klan, in New England in particular, did target French-Canadians. Mark Richard has written extensively on this. Klansmen can and should be properly categorized as anti-Catholic. The organization specifically prohibited Catholics from joining and its actions often targeted the Catholic Church and Catholic populations.-- User:Namiba 13:14, 4 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Then the organization should be categorized as an anti-Catholic organization, but I do not think that the category for all its members should be in anti-Catholic activists, or any member if they did not lynch or brand a Catholic themselves or publish a hatred document or do anything significant of the kind on a personal basis. It's a bit like labelling any post-2016 British Conservative politician or member as a Brexit activist because of their mandatory support of the party manifesto while it is quite well known that many had contrasted views (euphemism). Place Clichy ( talk) 14:28, 6 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Purge, Merge, then Delete all people from these categories per WP:OPINIONCAT; if there are organizations or events that remain probably belong in Category:Anti-Catholicism and Category:Anti-Protestantism and the nominated categories can be deleted. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 16:40, 24 March 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete all - Looking over Category:Antireligion. it doesn't look like we categorise this way. And that aside, what's an Anti-Catholic, Anti-Protestant, Anti-clericalist, etc? Sounds like we are applying labels and are in WP:OR/ WP:NEOLOGISM territory here. - jc37 20:51, 8 April 2021 (UTC) reply
    • Well anti-clericalism was a defined phenomenon in France from 1789 well into the 20th-century, it existed in Mexico especially in the 1920s, but in some ways from the 1860s if not earlier. It was very different in both places, in Mexico in some ways it manifested in banning foriegn clerics, but in France that was never a part of it. It is clearly not a neologism. The fact that Catholics and Protestants burned each other at the stake over religious issues in the 16th-century is well documented. Mary I killed a punch of protestants and drove and equal number of them to exile in Switzerland, and Elizabeth I had a regime that punished Catholics, although some of this was more political than religious. These are clear phenomenon that really did exist. How easy it is to categorize people under these headings is a different story. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 18:10, 13 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete While these things clearly exist, I do not think it is easy enough to come down with a straight up or down categorization. We would think that executioners for Queen Mary I were involved with anti-Protestantism, but to say that they were anti-Protestant would not be clear, they were just doing as taught. I also think the tendency to group together people engaged in largely political and in religious debates is going to conflate unlike things. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 18:13, 13 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Delete unhelpful bias categories. ( t · c) buidhe 04:42, 21 April 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Purge, Merge, then Delete all people from these categories per WP:OPINIONCAT; if there are organizations or events that remain probably belong in Category:Anti-Catholicism and Category:Anti-Protestantism and the nominated categories can be deleted. Same as Carlossuarez46. -- Just N. ( talk) 19:02, 22 April 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.

MOS:SUFFIXDASH moves

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. I cannot amend WP:SUFFIXDASH for articles, but there is a lack of consensus about applying it to list categories, so I believe I must now insert an exception there for such categories.
Just rename the two current outliers from spaced to hyphen:
– Fayenatic London 22:30, 20 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Original nomination on Speedy page
Additionally proposed

These two would/should currently use a hyphen per C2CÖ

Nominator's rationale: Either these categories should be moved per MOS:SUFFIXDASH, or that guideline should be abolished as suggested in some of the comments. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 ( 𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 22:31, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply

+Oppose absent any evidence anybody has actually been confused by any of these, it is just a theoretical problem that we don't need to solve, and per BHG. Thryduulf ( talk) 15:03, 26 March 2021 (UTC) reply

@ Thryduulf What is your opinion on the cited MOS guideline in general? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 ( 𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:01, 26 March 2021 (UTC) reply
Similarly, it's a fine solution for a problem that doesn't exist in the real world. Thryduulf ( talk) 22:35, 26 March 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:Ottoman bishops

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 to Category:Bishops in the Ottoman Empire. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:29, 14 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: The bishops were not "Ottomans". They were of different nationalities. They served their episcopate within the bounds of the Ottoman Empire. Some were Roman Catholic, others Eastern Catholic. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 21:56, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
Comment PK is probably correct. Just to note that in the current cat, there are no Greek Orthodox, or Armenian bishops. That's not to say that they are not out there. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 17:59, 21 March 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.

Years in the War in Iraq (2013–2017)

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. It seems that everyone agrees that the current names are not appropriate, so a renomination may be the best thing to advise here. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:27, 13 May 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: The rest of the hierarchy has been renamed Category:War in Iraq (2013–2017) to match the lead article. These nine were also proposed for speedy renaming, but Armbrust opposed the short names on the basis that
these should be renamed to use " War in Iraq (2013–2017)" instead of just " War in Iraq" (which redirects to Iraq War).
Place Clichy countered that
There was no other War in Iraq in either 2014, 2015, 2016 or 2017 so the article's disambiguator is not only redundant and useless, it would be misleading.
However, William Allen Simpson also opposed with a different suggestion:
agree that there has been more than one war in Iraq, so qualifying by year is useful. However, it should be "yyyy of the War in Iraq (2013–2017)", for each year of a multi-year war.
(That discussion is archived at Category talk:Military operations of the Iraqi Civil War in 2017.) So, a full discussion is required. – Fayenatic London 21:28, 20 March 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:Roman Catholic archbishops in Asia

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: withdrawn ( non-admin closure) Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:10, 23 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: To match Category:Roman Catholic archbishops by continent and diocese - that is what the category contains. Rathfelder ( talk) 20:57, 20 March 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:2001 establishments in Andhra Prades

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: speedy delete WP:G7.– Fayenatic London 00:16, 27 March 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: It's just a {{ Category redirect}} to Category:2001 establishments in Andhra Pradesh, from a typo. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:22, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
@ BrownHairedGirl Shouldn't category redirects be nominated to RfD per Wikipedia:Soft redirect#Deletion? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 ( 𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:30, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰: When I have discussed them in the past, it was at CFD. I am not aware of any change in policy. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:40, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
@ BrownHairedGirl Are you sure the past nominations were checked against policy? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 ( 𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:42, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰: CFD is where it will be seen by the editors who understand categories. I just want this gone, and don't see what you are trying to achieve by making that task difficult. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:50, 20 March 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:Washington, D.C. sport-related lists

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 for whether it should be sport or sports. Adding category redirect to the red-linked one for now. - jc37 15:18, 12 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: This was moved per my nomination at WP:CFDS, but it appears that members of Category:American sports-related lists by state use "sports". According to another user in an off-wiki discussion, this might be an WP:ENGVAR difference, so this category might need to be moved back instead of moving Category:American sports-related lists by state and all members to "sport". 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 ( 𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:34, 20 March 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.

Roman Catholic archbishops by diocese

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:27, 14 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: The form of the parent category is Category:Roman Catholic archbishops in France so this name should follow the parental form. The additional information (the "by diocese" splitter) should be at the end of the title. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 16:51, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
Support- makes good sense JarrahTree 13:08, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
Oops! Nom corrected now. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 13:18, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
Oops again! Links on category pages corrected now. – Fayenatic London 08:56, 21 March 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:Billboard Hot Latin Songs number-one singles

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:25, 14 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Part of phasing out categories for number-one songs.

Also proposing deletion of the following categories as they subcharts of the main category.:

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.

Roman Catholic archbishops in the United States, Canada, UK

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:24, 14 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per form of all other Roman Catholic diocese and bishop categories. Whatever about the correctness of the form, for the sake of consistency the form ought to be followed. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 13:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
Comment Personally, I don't care one way or the other, but the nomination should include the other archdioceses in the US, and they are numerous, for which this is also the case. Farragutful ( talk) 14:00, 20 March 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:Roman Catholic archbishops by diocese and country

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 to Category:Roman Catholic archbishops by country and diocese. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:22, 14 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: The first splitter is "by country" so that should appear first in the title. The next piece of additional information (the "by diocese" splitter) should be at the end of the title. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 13:17, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
Grand so. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 14:17, 20 March 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:Rapid human growth change 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.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Rapid human age change in fiction. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:21, 14 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: How is this defining? What is rapid human growth change? We don't have any article about this concept nor any similar categories. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:32, 20 March 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:Dinosaurs of Chile

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 - Though it probably shouldn't have been completely emptied while discussion was ongoing, it sounds (from the discussion) like it had 3 articles and all 3 are currently categorized appropriately elsewhere in the tree. - jc37 15:10, 12 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: New category, dinosaurs are categorised by continent, as political boundaries didn't apply in the Jurassic. Le Deluge ( talk) 09:42, 20 March 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:Defunct departments of the United Kingdom Government

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 - jc37 15:02, 12 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: rename, fix the order between "government" and "United Kingdom" per WP:C2D, WP:C2C: Government of the United Kingdom, Departments of the Government of the United Kingdom, Category:Government of the United Kingdom, Category:Departments of the Government of the United Kingdom. There is also a capitalization issue (G or g), but the discussion about capitalization should be left to a broader discussion based on a nomination of all subcategories within Category:Government of the United Kingdom. The first three nominated categories were earlier opposed at WP:CFDS. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:36, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
copy of speedy discussion
@ Oculi, William Allen Simpson, and Laurel Lodged: pinging contributors to earlier speedy discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 09:39, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support - Government is capitalised in the UK when used in this sense: see Parliament and the Government: 'the Government', 'HM Government', Her Majesty's Government (term). This said I would prefer 'government of the United Kingdom' to the present 'United Kingdom Government'; Wikipedia:Category_names#State-based topics explicitly favours 'of Foo' for Government. Oculi ( talk) 11:54, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Support but I too agree with Oculi and would prefer 'government of the United Kingdom'. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 13:25, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
    • I would prefer 'Government of the United Kingdom' because it is (part of) a formal title (Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland). Oculi ( talk) 18:47, 20 March 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Neutral: as the creator (many years ago) of the departmental ones, I believe I followed some kind of rubric in coming up with them - but I may have not done or that may have since changed. However, what William Allen Simpson ( talk · contribs) said above rings a bell - I believe the logic was that the description is supposed to get more precise as you go along the category name. I don't think it's a hugely important difference, I don't think we need to change it to improve the functionality or usability of the encyclopaedia, and I don't think changing it is going to be worth the time - but if it fits better with the relevant article names then perhaps that's reason enough.
In terms of capitalisation, there is a distinction between "government in the United Kingdom", which is a concept, and "the Government of the United Kingdom", which is a thing. I think the terminology, and capitalisation, here is a little different to that in the US, where "government" is more commonly taken to include not only the executive power but also the judicial and legislative - which it absolutely would not be in the UK. This category is about what Americans would consider to be the executive branch, so whatever we do, we need to keep government capitalised in this context. ninety: one 10:46, 21 March 2021 (UTC) reply
  • All too long -- Several of the non-ministerial ones are "Executive agencies", though perhaps not all. Departments of UK government would be long enough. Ministerial departments should be departments. The government legal service is miscategorised: it is overseen by Attorney-General, though he is technically not a minister; this also applies to Crown Prosecution Service. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:01, 21 March 2021 (UTC) reply
Some of them might have EA status, but they are still departments, and not all departments are EAs. The Government Legal Department, which used to be called the Treasury Solicitor's Department, is a NMGD (and an EA). The Government Legal Profession (which used to be called the Government Legal Service) is related but separate. There is an functional distinction between ministerial and non-ministerial departments which we ought to preserve. (The Attorney General is by convention not a member of the cabinet (he merely "attends" it), but he is nonetheless a minister.) ninety: one 18:55, 21 March 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:Government agencies and parastatals of Kwara State

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:17, 14 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: merge to Category:Executive branch of the government of Kwara State, Category:State agencies and parastatals of Nigeria and Category:Organizations based in Kwara State per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only one article. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:24, 20 March 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:Government agencies and parastatals of Kano State

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: merge to Category:Government of Kano State, Category:State agencies and parastatals of Nigeria and Category:Organizations based in Kano State per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only one article. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:20, 20 March 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.

Medieval Lutheran churches

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:14, 14 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: rename, the current category names are confusing because the churches were Catholic when built in the 11th to 15th century and converted to Lutheranism in the 16th century. The target categories exactly exist to circumvent that kind of confusion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 08:00, 20 March 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:Wikipedians who have access to Questia

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 - jc37 21:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: According to the article Questia, As of December 21, 2020, it ceased operations. See also Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Questia/Userbox * Pppery * it has begun... 01:46, 20 March 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:Recipients of the Order of Menelik II

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:14, 14 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING ( WP:OVERLAPCAT, WP:PERFCAT, and WP:OCAWARD)
The Order of Menelik II was a house order from Ethiopia and, without exception, all the Ethiopians in this category are members of the Ethiopian Royal Family who are already categorized under Category:Ethiopian Royal Family. Most of the foreign recipients don't mention Ethiopia at all beyond the award so it may have been a diplomatic souvenir. (There are a a couple exceptions with ambassadors and military advisors to the county but they are already well categorized.) There wasn't a list so I created one right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 00:32, 20 March 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:Recipients of the Order of the Roman Eagle

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING ( WP:OCAWARD)
The Order of the Roman Eagle was a short-lived general purpose award from Fascist Italy from 1942-45. The only articles in the category is King Victor Emmanuel III of Italy and 3 German Nazi officials, all of which just mention this award in passing with other honours. There wasn't a list so I created one right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect ( talk) 00:32, 20 March 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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_20&oldid=1022887251"

Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE