< November 10	November 12 >

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. Arguments that the category is too small to keep or has no hope of expansion have been answered by populating the category. (non-admin closure) Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 15:22, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Fictional armoured fighting vehicles to Category:Fictional military vehicles

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. This category only has one entry and not much potential for expansion. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:23, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just delete, the article is not about (fictional) military. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:58, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this did only contain Batmobile but I have added two others, Mako (Mass Effect) and Thunder Machine (G.I. Joe). IMHO it's a valid intersection of Category:Armoured fighting vehicles and Category:Fictional military vehicles, with potential for growth. – Fayenatic London 13:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac 1 5 23:43, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete We don't seem to have many articles on individual vehicles of this type, so I do not see much scope for expansion here. Dimadick (talk) 20:33, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Eight articles qualify as AFVs. --Atvica (talk) 20:24, 28 November 2020 (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.

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:Chinese western-style operas. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Chinese contemporary classical operas to Category:Opera in Chinese

Nominator's rationale: Opera is by essence under the umbrella of classical music, no need to emphasize; opera wasn't developed in China until the 20th century — the compositions are always contemporary, so there's no need to specify. The new name also avoids confusion with "Chinese opera", the wildly-recognized yet potentially misleading terminology for the traditional native art form. Seanetienne (talk) 18:46, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alt rename to Category:Chinese western-style operas which is the terminology that many articles use. In addition this is a set category requiring "operas" in plural. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:58, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see. How about Category:Chinese-language operas, as per other "operas by languages" categories. Even though that's widely used, through language knowledge it's easy to notice the redundancy. However, the current soft redirect has to be deleted first. Seanetienne (talk) 01:21, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that still too ambiguous? Marcocapelle (talk) 04:40, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My view is that opera is by essence western, so no need to emphasise. Moreover, it’s the terminology “Chinese opera” that causes the problem, so “Opera” should not be held accountable and does not bear the obligation to clarify itself. The insertion of “western-style” also makes the feeling that it means “western-influenced/modernly-developed” native art form. With that being said, allowing for the circumstances, there is no foreseen possibility that both the integrity and reader-friendliness being satisfied, so perhaps your proposal is the most suitable option. Seanetienne (talk) 06:24, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alt rename to Category:Chinese western-style operas which is the terminology that many articles use. Marcocapelles statements seems convincing. -- Just N. (talk) 13:08, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alt rename per Marcocapelle. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 15:39, 1 December 2020 (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.

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) 23:49, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Hotchkiss School (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category has one article (on the school itself) and one subcategory (about its alumni). If there are other relevant articles, perhaps they should be added, but as presented I do not believe this category is necessary. Kinu ^t/_c 06:15, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. Meanwhile the category contains three articles of which one entirely irrelevant. The two relevant articles already link to each other directly. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:04, 11 November 2020 (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.

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) 23:48, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:UAAP men's basketball tournament to Category:UAAP men's basketball tournaments

Nominator's rationale: Pluralized "tournament". Howard the Duck (talk) 14:43, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac 1 5 03:11, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, when we would follow the article titles, it would become Category:UAAP men's basketball tournament seasons but that is quite a long category name. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. -- Just N. (talk) 17:45, 11 November 2020 (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.

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. MER-C 10:48, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Patterson Distinguished Service Medal recipients

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)

The Patterson Medal is Canadian meteorological award named after John Patterson. We have a Catch-22 where, when the award is defining to people, they aren't notable enough for an article and, when they're notable enough for an article, the category is no longer defining. Accordingly, most of the winners don't have an article and, for the ones that do, this award is generally listed in passing and isn't defining. The contents are already listified here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:26, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Illogical nomination: any award winner category would be deleted if ones follow this logic, even such categories as Category:Nobel laureates in Physics which should be redundant with the article List of Nobel laureates in Physics. Pierre cb (talk) 04:25, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The second paragraph of WP:OCAWARD explains this nicely: I'm not suggesting the category should be deleted because a list exists. I'm arguing that the category should go away because it's WP:NONDEFINING and the best way to implement that is to make sure readers interested in the topic have a list since it's a WP:NOTABLE topic. RevelationDirect (talk) 10:37, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support, obvious case of WP:OCAWARD. The nomination is not because there is duplication with the list but because of lack of definingness. That does not apply to Nobel laureates in physics. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:37, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support WP:OCAWARD. --Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 09:37, 18 November 2020 (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.

November 11

Category:Fictional armoured fighting vehicles

Basketball players by city or town in the United States

Category:Chinese contemporary classical operas

Category:Pupils of Nadia Boulanger

Category:Hotchkiss School

Category:UAAP men's basketball tournament

Category:Patterson Distinguished Service Medal recipients‎

Category:Prix de Flore winners

Category:American Catholic writers