< February 13 February 15 >

February 14

Category:Catholic cathedrals by autonomous particular church

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) 15:22, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Catholic cathedrals by autonomous particular church (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Catholic cathedrals in Canada by autonomous particular church (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Catholic cathedrals in Ukraine by autonomous particular church (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Catholic cathedrals in the United States by autonomous particular church (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: This is a follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_January_6#Category:Catholic_churches_by_autonomous_particular_church. The first one now nominated here duplicates Category:Eastern Catholic cathedrals, except for the Roman Catholic sub-cat which is in the parent Category:Catholic cathedrals. The others are not needed as well as Category:Catholic cathedrals in Canada, Category:Catholic cathedrals in Ukraine & Category:Catholic cathedrals in the United States. – Fayenatic London 22:39, 14 February 2017 (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:Television programs by 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. Timrollpickering 11:55, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: In this December CfD, it was suggested that shows would be a better term than programs/programmes, as it avoids the WP:ENGVAR issue. That discussion wasn't directly about this category tree, so here's a new one.
Subcategories
*Category:LGBT-related television programs by country
--Paul_012 (talk) 21:45, 14 February 2017 (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:Television programming by language

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/rename to Category:Television programs by language (and Foo-language television programs for the subcats). There is a consensus to move away from programming and shows, but no consensus on program versus programme. I am selecting program by default, to align with that category's parent, Category:Television programs. There was some discussion of applying WP:ENGVAR to the by-country television shows categories, but those were not tagged and will have to be nominated separately. -- Black Falcon (talk) 04:33, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: (Also open to the alternative Category:Television programs by language.)
The term programming was chosen for this category tree back in this 2009 CfD, in order to solve the ENGVAR discrepancies between program and programmes. However, "programming" is actually confusing, because it incorrectly suggests that these are supposed to be concept categories about the activity/process of television programming, while their actual intended scope is for individual programs/programmes/shows. This category tree should be a child of Category:Television programs, not Category:Television programming (which has since become a concept cat about the process).
I've suggested renaming to shows instead of programs because it was suggested in this recent CfD that shows would be a better term due to ENGVAR. I'll list a separate CfD for the rest of the programs tree. If that discussion results in keeping programs/programmes, this tree should also use programs/programmes instead.
Note that this proposal will overturn previous CfDs from here, here, here and here.
Also nominated
*Category:Television programs by language (Should be merged.)
  • Category:Afrikaans-language television programming
  • Category:Arabic-language television programming
  • Category:Armenian-language television programming
  • Category:Azerbaijani-language television programming
  • Category:Balochi-language television programming
  • Category:Bengali-language television programming
  • Category:Cantonese-language television programming
  • Category:Chinese-language television programming
  • Category:Dutch-language television programming
  • Category:English-language television programming
  • Category:Filipino-language television programming
  • Category:French-language television programming
  • Category:German-language television programming
  • Category:Greek-language television programming
  • Category:Hindi-language television programming
  • Category:Hokkien-language television programming
  • Category:Icelandic-language television programming
  • Category:Indonesian-language television programming
  • Category:Irish-language television programming
  • Category:Italian-language television programming
  • Category:Japanese-language television programming
  • Category:Kashmiri-language television programming
  • Category:Korean-language television programming
  • Category:Malayalam-language television programming
  • Category:Mandarin-language television programming
  • Category:Marathi-language television programming
  • Category:Mongolian-language television programming
  • Category:Norwegian-language television programming
  • Category:Pashto-language television programming
  • Category:Polish-language television programming
  • Category:Portuguese-language television programming
  • Category:Punjabi-language television programming
  • Category:Russian-language television programming
  • Category:Serbian-language television programming
  • Category:Sindhi-language television programming
  • Category:Spanish-language television programming
  • Category:Swahili-language television programming
  • Category:Tamil-language television programming
  • Category:Telugu-language television programming
  • Category:Thai-language television programming
  • Category:Turkish-language television programming
  • Category:Urdu-language television programming
  • Category:Uyghur-language television programming
  • Category:Welsh-language television programming
  • Category:Wu-language television programming
  • Category:Zulu-language television programming
--Paul_012 (talk) 21:28, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Category:Television programming by language &
  • Category:Television programs by language
doesn't feel useful. Similarly between
Category:Television programming doesn't match a parent article, the apparent parent article is a redirect to Broadcast programming. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:26, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: I disagree with Marcocapelle's point that programming fails to capture the intended meaning. The industry sense of programming is a relatively technical one. The word scheduling covers very similar ground (and is used in that way, as well in a more restricted sense, in the article) and I think it would be the more popular name for the activity. Programming to mean "television content" is clear enough. Show is too restrictive. I would also revert the other category changes that have followed the same misplaced logic. Matt's talk 10:33, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that this wasn't really my point but rather a summary of the discussion so far. It is basically the distinction between a set category (containing items, in this case programs or shows) versus a topic category (in this case about the process of programming). Marcocapelle (talk) 16:54, 25 July 2017 (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:Kazakh ambassador

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:Lists of ambassadors of Kazakhstan (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:38, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Pointless sub-category. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:35, 14 February 2017 (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:Politically leftist Wikipedians

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: keep the user boxes but delete the categories. – Fayenatic London 08:29, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: per WP:USERCAT#Inappropriate_types_of_user_categories: "Categories which group users by advocacy of a position". BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:37, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But you have similar user-boxes on your own page - e.g. User:FingersOnRoids/ProGayMarriage. StAnselm (talk) 20:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for adding that. I'm not sure why BrownHairedGirl didn't add it or respond to my question. AusLondonder (talk) 23:03, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@AusLondonder: The reason that I didn't respond to your question was that I was unaware of it, because I hadn't revisited the discussion and you had chosen not to ping me.
Anyway, now that you did ping me, I am here, so I'll happily answer: I hadn't seen the other category at the time. I just saw Category:Politically leftist Wikipedians, and knew it was a blatant USERVAT violation, so I quickly CFDed it and moved on.
Well done spotting Category:Politically right-wing Wikipedians. Yes, of course it should go too, and thanks for adding it to the nomination. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:34, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@BrownHairedGirl: Ok, no worries. I had assumed you would revisit the discussion but I should have pinged you. If we do decide to delete these two categories then there are perhaps others within Category:Wikipedians by philosophy which would be of concern such as Category:Trotskyist Wikipedians and Category:Wikipedians who adhere to progressivism. AusLondonder (talk) 23:52, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@AusLondonder: glad we cleared that up. As to other categories, I think there is an equally strong case for getting rid of them: Wikipedia's NPOV core policy is not be facilitating networking between any group of people with a shared political agenda. I'd happy for someone to add them to this nom, or alternatively to start a new nomination of them. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:06, 18 February 2017 (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:Geography of Palestine (region)

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: not done. Deryck C. 13:56, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Obviously "geography of <foo> region" is the same as "<foo> region". Typically we have a "geography of <foo>", where foo is a state, but we already have Palestinian geography categories at Category:Geography of the Palestinian territories. GreyShark (dibra) 06:54, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But you do realize that Palestine (region) is a geographic article and thus Geography of Palestine (region) is the same topic (there is no such an article).GreyShark (dibra) 09:54, 14 February 2017 (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:Grand Princes of Tver

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. ℯxplicit 00:51, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge, contains only one article and according to Prince of Tver there has been only one Grand Prince of Tver. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:33, 14 February 2017 (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:Titles in Kievan Rus

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: keep. – Fayenatic London 15:31, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge, only contains a single child category. While it's part of an established tree by country, I suppose we don't have to have every former country in the tree as well. Many current countries aren't even in the tree yet, for example the Belorussian titles category doesn't exist, so that we can't merge the nominated category to its Belorussian counterpart. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:26, 14 February 2017 (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:Individual bikinis

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: keep (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:45, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Categorycruft. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 03:48, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"Well populated"? There are only 4 articles. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 16:19, 14 February 2017 (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 from Pechenga

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:People from Murmansk Oblast (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:48, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting category
Nominator's rationale: Propose deleting as unpopulated (1 entry since created in 2016) and of no discernible notability. Quis separabit? 03:08, 14 February 2017 (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 from Pechengsky District

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) 06:50, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting category
Nominator's rationale: Propose deleting as unpopulated (1 entry since created in 2016) and of no discernible notability. Quis separabit? 03:08, 14 February 2017 (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.
More