< February 10 February 12 >

February 11

Category:English-language Canadian films

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. (Only the first one was tagged.) – Fayenatic London 08:55, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Long list
Nominator's rationale: Some of these are comically overlapping with just the plain "[Nationality] films"; others are just very small and dubious; and in most cases this is just WP:OVERCAT from an intersection - all of these films already have Category:English-language films and the relevant nationality. The mere fact of sharing a language and being produced in the same country is not really a pertinent combination, and most of these films are indeed very much unrelated to each other. So these categories fail the purpose of a category, which is to link related pages together, not be the equivalent of Wikidata about random characteristics of a film... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:13, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be busy temporarily so if somebody wants to start adding the CFD template to all of these and they do so before I get back, you're welcome to do so. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:20, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • So far there are few comments on these points specifically so a fresh more focused nomination might be useful. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:26, 16 February 2022 (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:LGBT-related Christmas films

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. – Fayenatic London 08:02, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:NARROWCAT and probably WP:DEFCAT too (films may be notable for being about LGBT subjects; and they might be notable for having Christmas as their subject too; but the intersection of these too is a random, non-defining intersection - LGBT-related Christmas films is, correctly, not an actual article - and "related" is an awfully vague word). See also WP:NOT. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:42, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Same for the other one, on top of the fact that it contained only two films (and one of them seemed at best dubiously categorised, so I removed it). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:07, 11 February 2022 (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:Sex offenders

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: convert to container category. It would be helpful to start a fresh discussion for renaming of the national sub-categories, after which this could then be merged. Note the early precedent Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_August_14#Category:American_sex_offenders (which ended with no consensus). – Fayenatic London 07:54, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: It's unclear to me under what circumstances a person could be a sex offender without being convicted of a sex offense. I can't see why these shouldn't be merged. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 15:06, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If they're known to be. For example, Jimmy Savile & Cyril Smith. Jim Michael (talk) 15:31, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • As above, it would be inconsistent to containerize this category if not also the 30 nationality categories are (discussed and) containerized. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:33, 16 February 2022 (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:Granddaughters of Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia

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. – Fayenatic London 21:50, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose merging Category:Granddaughters of Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia to Category:Descendants of Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia
  • Propose merging Category:Great-grandsons of Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia to Category:Descendants of Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia
  • Propose merging Category:Grandsons of Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia to Category:Descendants of Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia
  • Propose merging Category:Great-granddaughters of Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia to Category:Descendants of Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization. Being someone's grandchild/great-grandchild etc is not more defining than simply being a general descendant, and considering royal marriage paterns many people are probably descendants in different lines in different generations. The Category:House of Saud already covers a lot as well.★Trekker (talk) 12:03, 11 February 2022 (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:WikiProject SETI members

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) 07:44, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The supposed WikiProject does not exist anymore. Geschichte (talk) 10:30, 11 February 2022 (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:Chlamydiae

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. – Fayenatic London 21:45, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The informal name of this phylum ("Chlamydiae") has been replaced by a valid name for this phylum (Chlamydiota).[1] The category name should reflect this nomenclatural update. Ninjatacoshell (talk) 04:00, 11 February 2022 (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.

Underpopulated Stub Categories

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. – Fayenatic London 09:27, 15 March 2022 (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:Epsilonproteobacteria

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. – Fayenatic London 08:02, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The informal name of this phylum ("Epsilonproteobacteria") has been replaced by a valid name for this phylum (Campylobacterota).[2] The category name should reflect this nomenclatural update. Ninjatacoshell (talk) 01:49, 11 February 2022 (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