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) Qwerfjkl talk 16:27, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Byzantine queens consort (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING WP:ARBITRARYCAT. These royal women were not queens consort of the Byzantine Empire (as the name might suggest), they were just born in the Byzantine Empire and then moved abroad to marry a king of some other country. It is that other country which defines their queenship, their "job", not the country they just so happened to have been born in. (If the "Byzantine" part had been important, this should have been a subcategory of Category:Byzantine women by occupation, but it isn't, unlike Category:Byzantine empresses‎, Category:Byzantine women writers‎) etc.). Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:41, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. We already have Category:Byzantine empresses which suffices. This category is merely confusing. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete but the fact that this category isn't in an appropriate parent category is not a worthwile argument for anything.★Trekker (talk) 12:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Probably delete, but could potentially be retitled to reflect its contents: Queens of Byzantine origin or Queens of Byzantine nationality. Not particularly useful to separate the contents by those that are queens consort and those that are queens regnant—nearly all queens at this point in time will be queens consort, which would leave at best one large category and one small one—if there are any queens regnant at all—and the terminology is modern and seems jarringly anachronistic and hypercorrect in relation to the Byzantine Empire. P Aculeius (talk) 13:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:43, 28 August 2023 (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: speedy keep. Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 20:37, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Irreligion in the Arab world to Category:Irreligion by country

Nominator's rationale: WP:ARBITRARYCAT, there is no agreed definition of "Arab world". The items should be merged to sibling Category:Irreligion by country; the child Category:Arab atheists should be re-parented to Category:Atheists by ethnicity. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done the latter. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:27, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Support~~, apparently there aren't any overarching articles about the topic for the entire Arab world. Some sibling categories may be nominated for the same reason. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:20, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Striking vote per discussion below. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:22, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, as this forms part of Category:Religion in the Arab world. – Fayenatic London 14:34, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That may be, but there is nothing "Arab world"-specific about the children, which are all "by country" cats. "Arab atheists" is borderless as they can live anywhere in the world. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe so, but the Arab atheists who are currently in the category are all within Middle East & North Africa.
Anyway, my point is that it would be invidious to remove just one sub-cat of Category:Religion in the Arab world. It would be better to have this discussion at that level, including Bahá'í Faith in the Arab world, Hinduism in the Arab world etc. As long as we have Category:Religion in the Arab world, it is positively helpful to be able to navigate between the 7 articles about irreligion in various Arab countries. – Fayenatic London 15:40, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing that out, that is true. Unfortunately it turns out to be another WP:CROSSCAT between ethnicity and nationality, so that just shifts the problem.

I thought it would be easier to start with a relatively simple subcat to set a precedent, but that it may be viewed as unfair to nominate only one is something I can understand.

Maybe a better solution is to simply alt merge to Category:Irreligion in the Middle East? It has a main article Irreligion in the Middle East and mostly the same contents already. We would have to let Morocco go, but that is already in Category:Irreligion in Africa (which has main article Irreligion in Africa), so I think it's fine. What do you think? Also asking @Marcocapelle? Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:13, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nederlandse Leeuw: that would not solve FL's objection. In retrospect I was a bit sloppy with my initial reaction, I should have said something like, support but please co-nominate the sibling categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle Alright then let me say it more explicitly: we should merge the whole Category:Religion in the Arab world tree into Category:Religion in the Middle East. The "irreligion" subcat is just an example of how the former is a massive WP:REDUNDANTFORK of the latter, except that it adds a few North African countries (which should be purged), omits Turkey, Israel and Kurdistan, and generalises them all as "Arab". That's just pan-Arab nationalism in action. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 17:55, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would definitely support that as a clear case of WP:OVERLAPCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:58, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would not oppose a fresh nomination to do that; there are only a few articles with relevant scope that would belong in both ME and NA, e.g. Shia Muslims in the Arab world and List of Jews from the Arab world. For Jews and Judaism categories, there are already Jews and Judaism in the Mashriq/Jews and Judaism in the Maghreb which may not be needed as well as Jews and Judaism in the Middle East/Jews and Judaism in North Africa; the inherent overlaps of those could be considered later, and for now they should simplify the work of splitting the Religion hierarchy. Category:Bahá'í Faith in the Arab world could be renamed to NA and purged of two articles; etc. – Fayenatic London 11:24, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Fayenatic london @Marcocapelle Alright then, for procedural reasons I would like to ask Marcocapelle to strike his 'Support' !vote so that I can withdraw the nomination and start over with a fresh nomination as proposed by Fayenatic. (That's how it works, right?). Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 10:28, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see no need for him to strike his support !vote, but if he would express support for a wider nomination then that would avoid any criticism about best practice per WP:CSK. – Fayenatic London 14:07, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for linking to WP:CSK, I never knew that page existed! The relevant provision seems to be 1.1: If a good faith editor in good standing recommends delete or redirect, the AfD should not be speedily closed using this ground. Theoretically supporting the merge as nominated is not a delete or redirect, but in practice it will lead to the deletion of the existing category. Marcocapelle is evidently a good faith editor with good standing, so we can't ignore his !vote. If I understand correctly, Marcocapelle should formally retract his Support !vote. Informally he has already expressed willingness to do so, and support for a wider nomination: In retrospect I was a bit sloppy with my initial reaction, I should have said something like, support but please co-nominate the sibling categories. and I would definitely support that [the new proposal NL made and Fayenatic supported]. But just to be on the closer's safe side, I would like to ask him to formally retract that Support !vote to allow me to request a Withdrawal and for a closer to approve it per 1.1. (That may be pendantic and bureaucratic, but in practice we already agree and there is no reason to continue this nom if we want to start over and already agree how.) Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:36, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Marcocapelle (talk) 18:22, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  Thanks! Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:45, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw as nom. All participants agree to start over with a fresh, broader nomination. Thanks for the good feedback! Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:45, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Qwerfjkl Could you speedy-close this? Thanks! Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:25, 21 August 2023 (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: do not merge; delete Category:Non-cellular life. I note that in other Wikipedias the categories linked at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q9513006 include more articles such as prion, viroid, virusoid and satellite (biology), but most of these are not even mentioned in the page non-cellular life, so there seems to be no case for further discussion. – Fayenatic London 20:45, 29 August 2023 (UTC) – Fayenatic London 20:45, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Monodnaviria to Category:DNA viruses

Propose deleting Category:Non-cellular life

Nominator's rationale: merge, DNA viruses is a more clearly defining characteristic of the content of this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:23, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Parent/Neutral on Merge The Non-cellular life article seems to be a concept that has not yet gained strong traction and it's under Category:Hypothetical life forms. No objection to recreation though if there are articles about this concept or the concept becomes official taxonomy. (Defer to others on the value of the Monodnaviria category.) - 02:41, 7 August 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RevelationDirect (talk • contribs)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For more input on the merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 19:50, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 09:24, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Category:Monodnaviria - I would think the taxonomnic parents would be most defining characteristic in taxonomy. merge Category:Non-cellular life to Category:DNA viruses as redundant, as the realm Monodnaviria consists exclusively of DNA viruses and they seem to be no more non-cellular than any other viruses. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:19, 23 August 2023 (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: keep. I have added a "see also" link from Category:Presidents to allow the navigation that the nominator wanted. – Fayenatic London 15:12, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Acting presidents by country to Category:Acting presidents

Nominator's rationale: rename and re-parent so that it becomes an immediate subcategory of Category:Presidents. It is strange that you can currently only find acting president via the by country subtree. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:28, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose renaming Current name is appropriate for subcats. The proposed target is a potentially valid parent cat for which other subcats (Acting presidents by decade/century?) are possible. Star Garnet (talk) 22:31, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For just two extra subcategories (decade and century) we would not need two category layers. Besides those two extra subcategories are hypothetical for the time being. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You certainly would need an extra layer. As is, the proposal is just an artificial broadening of a category that cleanly fits where it is now. Star Garnet (talk) 01:05, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 20:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Star Garnet. I also don't see any advantage in doing this. I recommend keeping things the way they are. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:32, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 09:23, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Star Garnet and Nederlandse Leeuw. Seems to be the standard way of naming categories of the form Cat: Foo by country. ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Acting presidents would be a sensible parent for this and any other potential splits (by century, etc) and for articles relating to acting presidents overall (such as key article Acting president). Grutness...wha? 12:30, 20 August 2023 (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. – Fayenatic London 20:47, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Arab–Iranian conflict (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, the scope seems to overlap with Category:Arab nationalism in Iran. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:18, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Well yes, its only item Arab separatism in Khuzestan does, but the purported main article is Arab–Iranian conflict, which redirects to Iran–Saudi Arabia proxy conflict, which already has Category:Iran–Saudi Arabia proxy conflict. That's a very different conflict from Arab separatism in Khuzestan, which has mostly been between Iraq under Saddam versus the Islamic Republic of Iran. It was one of the major pretexts for Saddam to invade Iran in 1980, leading to the Iran–Iraq War. Saudi Arabia had very little to do with it. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:57, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:43, 28 August 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 17:02, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Alumni of Preston Lodge High School to Category:People educated at Preston Lodge High School

Nominator's rationale: This is a secondary institution; alumni is used for Higher or tertiary institutions Crowsus (talk) 19:32, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I might suggest you look at any 50 articles on high schools in the US or Canada and make note of the "Notable alumni" section or the essay "WP:ALUMNI" which offers guidance on how to create said section, including guidance on what an alumni is. This is a very widely accepted standard for how the term "alumni" is used here. Maintain the status quo. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 15:09, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How wrong can one person be?? Crowsus (talk) 12:28, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 08:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support The school is in Scotland, not in North America. Category:People educated by school in East Lothian gives the status quo. Facnil (talk) 11:21, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy rename per WP:C2C to match subcats of Category:People educated by school in Scotland and per WP:ENGVAR. ミラP@Miraclepine 01:42, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:35, 21 August 2023 (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: merge. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 17:03, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Coaching associations based in the United Kingdom to Category:Coaching associations and Category:Sports organisations of the United Kingdom

Nominator's rationale: merge, only three articles in the category and the parent is also sparsely populated. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:02, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 08:57, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:21, 23 August 2023 (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: purge and use "destroyed" instead of "damaged".. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 17:11, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Buildings and structures damaged by earthquakes to Category:Buildings and structures damaged or destroyed by earthquakes
Propose renaming Category:Buildings and structures destroyed in the 1906 San Francisco earthquake to Category:Buildings and structures damaged or destroyed by the 1906 San Francisco earthquake
Propose renaming Category:Buildings and structures demolished as a result of the 2011 Christchurch earthquake to Category:Buildings and structures damaged or destroyed by the 2011 Christchurch earthquake
Propose renaming Category:Buildings damaged by the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami to Category:Buildings and structures damaged or destroyed by the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami
Propose renaming Category:Buildings damaged by the 2023 Turkey–Syria earthquake to Category:Buildings and structures damaged or destroyed by the 2023 Turkey–Syria earthquake

Nominator's rationale: Lack of consistency with each other; includes buildings that were damaged to various degrees, including complete collapse. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 07:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative, use "destroyed" only, and purge, consistent with Category:Buildings and structures destroyed by natural disasters etc. Just "damaged" is not a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:37, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alternative suggestion Purge the damaged buildings, and use "Cat:Buildings and structures destroyed by or demolished due to the Foo earthquake" or similar as an alternative renaming. The Christchurch category (and I think the others too) include buildings destroyed by the earthquake and buildings which had to be demolished as a result of the earthquake damage. This latter group would not be covered by the original proposed renaming. Grutness...wha? 10:10, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can keep this as a headnote, it is too long for a category name. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:53, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fair. It is cumbersome. Grutness...wha? 02:03, 21 August 2023 (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: merge all. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 17:09, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Pan-Slavic languages to Category:Zonal constructed languages, Category:Slavic languages and Category:Pan-Slavism

Nominator's rationale: merge, only two articles in the category. By all means recreate the category when more articles will fit, but I would not expect that to happen soon. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:25, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It would absolutely be possible to fill this category with at least a dozen articles about language projects that are now discussed in Pan-Slavic language, but as you say, I don't see this happening in the near future—especially since the person writing them would probably have been me. :)
By the way, I would suggest doing the same with Category:Pan-Germanic languages: there we have three articles, but Wede is miscategorised, since its intended use is neither Pan-Germanic nor zonal. —IJzeren Jan _Uszkiełtu? 12:30, 20 August 2023 (UTC) And in general, Category:Zonal constructed languages is not that large that subdivision into many pan-somethings is necessary. —IJzeren Jan _Uszkiełtu? 15:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, in that case I am adding the following to this nomination, as below. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:10, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Pan-Germanic languages to Category:Zonal constructed languages, Category:Germanic languages and Category:Pan-Germanism
Propose merging Category:World German to Category:Zonal constructed languages and Category:German language

Merge all per nom and IJzeren Jan (nice to see you here!). Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:47, 21 August 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 17:08, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Dropsie College for Hebrew and Cognate Learning (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Small cat Mason (talk) 04:36, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:C2F, this could have been listed at speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:33, 20 August 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 17:08, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose Deleting Category:Members of the Fédération Internationale de Philatélie

Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING, WP:OCASSOC and (potentially) WP:OVERLAPCAT

The Fédération Internationale de Philatélie is the international association for stamp collecting and this category is for affiliated national organizations. Philatelic Federation of Pakistan is currently the only article in this category but SMALLCAT isn't an issue since most national bodies are in it, per the official FIP list. But that means this category could move most of the national organisations out from Category:Philatelic organizations to a subcategory many readers would be unfamiliar with. (Alternatively, if the consensus is to keep, I'm happy to populate it though.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:26, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:36, 20 August 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 17:07, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose Deleting Category:Members of Royal Agricultural Society

Nominator's rationale: WP:V, the spirit of WP:C1, an unpopulated category, and presumably WP:OCASSOC

There's not much here. The only article in this category, Tha Myat, makes no mention of being a member of this group. It's not even clear which organisation we're talking about here since Royal Agricultural Society is a disambiguation page. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:26, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mere membership of an organization is hardly ever a defining characteristic of an individual. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:38, 20 August 2023 (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.

August 20

18th-century Lithuanian people by occupation

Category:Byzantine queens consort

Category:Irreligion in the Arab world

Category:Monodnaviria

Category:Acting presidents by country

Category:10th-century women rulers

Category:Arab–Iranian conflict

Category:Head of Government elections

Category:Archaeological cultures of Central Asia

Category:11th-century rulers in Al-Andalus

Category:Indo-European archaeology

Category:7th-century women rulers

Category:8th-century women rulers

Category:Alumni of Preston Lodge High School

Category:Coaching associations based in the United Kingdom

Category:Romance legendary creatures

Category:9th-century women rulers

Category:Naval aviation in fiction

Category:Buildings and structures damaged by earthquakes

Category:Assassinated heads of government

Category:Pan-Slavic languages

Category:Dropsie College for Hebrew and Cognate Learning

Category:Members of the Fédération Internationale de Philatélie

Category:Members of Royal Agricultural Society