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) House Blaster (talk · he/him) 11:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Austrian Nazi lawyers to Category:Austrian Nazis and Category:Lawyers in the Nazi Party and Category:20th-century Austrian lawyers
Propose merging Category:Austrian Nazi bankers to Category:Austrian bankers and Category:Bankers in the Nazi Party

Nominator's rationale: Interesting, but non-defining intersection Mason (talk) 01:17, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 19:54, 18 March 2024 (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: no consensus. WP:NPASR. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 21:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Fictional dead characters to Category:Fiction about death

Nominator's rationale: Resurrected characters are not "dead characters". The remaining 3 categories make the necessity of this WP:NARROWCAT unconvincing, especially when it has no entries itself. There's the added problem of whether simply being dead is a defining trait, since being alive certainly isn't for a fictional character. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:46, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merging / keep this category, or at least merge Category:Fictional deaths by cause into Category:Fictional dead characters. AHI-3000 (talk) 20:53, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Being alive isn't a defining trait, certainly, since most characters in fiction are (since most fiction depends on characters' volition)l, but I wonder about being dead. This seems like the sort of category where a character who's already dead at the start of a story would go—folks who are only 'alive' in flashbacks, or who are only ever talked about in retrospect, with the character staying 'offstage.' Someone like Lu Ten in Avatar: The Last Airbender. P-Makoto (she/her) (talk) 02:30, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, without objection to a further merge as proposed by AHI-3000. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:08, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My suggestion is to keep Category:Fictional dead characters, and to merge Category:Fictional deaths by cause into Category:Fictional dead characters. AHI-3000 (talk) 02:18, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Except I believe it's better as a container category. An example of a non-defining death would be a continuation of a series set 500 years in the future. The main characters of the previous series would ostensibly be dead by that time, but the death was not of note because it wasn't unusual. Simply being dead is not necessarily a defining aspect for fictional characters. You would have to prove otherwise to make your suggestion make sense. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag Category:Fictional deaths by cause.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 16:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 19:51, 18 March 2024 (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: no consensus. As an individual, I will add a hatnote to the category pointing to the dab page. (non-admin closure) House Blaster (talk · he/him) 21:30, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Quantum Leap to Category:Quantum Leap (TV series)

Nominator's rationale: The category is used for both TV series. Gonnym (talk) 08:35, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, as there is a Quantum leap disambiguation page. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Am I missing something here? The category's capitalized, while the DAB page isn't. This appears to be in the right place. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Quantum Leap redirects to the disambiguation page. The title is still ambiguous. –Aidan721 (talk) 15:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose instead use Category:Quantum Leap (franchise) -- there are ancillary materials in the franchise, besides the original TV show and its reboot-sequel TV show, such as novels. The category should be structured so that it can accept articles on ancillary materials that are not part of either TV show's eras -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 06:40, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as Quantum Leap is a dab page, and that name reflects both TV series. Franchise is a less clear name for it in my opinion. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:21, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:45, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 19:42, 18 March 2024 (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:Culture of the Thracians. (non-admin closure) House Blaster (talk · he/him) 11:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose upmerging Category:Thracian culture to Category:Culture of ancient Thrace

Nominator's rationale: Same scope. Thracians are defined as an ancient people living in ancient Thrace. NLeeuw (talk) 14:41, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:49, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Not the same scope. Thrace was named for the Thracians, but they're believed to have come there from somewhere else, and after they were subdued, people from other cultures settled there and largely replaced Thracian culture. Equating the two in this way is like saying that "Etruscan culture" should be merged into "Culture of Tuscany". P Aculeius (talk) 14:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point. Might it be better to upmerge this category to Category:Thracians? There is no main article, there are only 2 items and 3 subcategories (of which Category:Thracian archaeology is already in Category:Thracology), and Category:Thracians is itself a relatively small category. NLeeuw (talk) 16:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That would leave Category:Culture of ancient Thrace almost empty. That would be a bit odd because ancient Thrace includes the Thracians living there. I still think the nomination is ok in principle though if needed we may purge content that is unrelated to the Thracians. Perhaps also rename to Culture of the Thracians if the name is felt to be ambiguous. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:10, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  "Culture of ancient Thrace" would include the Thracians while they were the dominant culture of Thrace, but not before or after that; it literally includes the predecessors of the Thracians as well as their Greek or Roman successors. "Thracian culture" theoretically applies only to the Thracians (unless you read "Thracian" meaning "of Thrace" rather than "of the Thracians"), including their origins before they settled in the land that came to be known as "Thrace". "Culture of the Thracians", as suggested by Marcocapelle, would be a logical alternative, and avoids any ambiguity. Either way, this could be a subcategory of "Culture of ancient Thrace". The fact that the latter is mostly empty says more about the current interests of Wikipedians than it does about the potential for the category for expansion. P Aculeius (talk) 23:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 23:34, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Query. @Nederlandse Leeuw: how do you feel about "Culture of the Thracians", as suggested by Marcocapelle? It might be the least ambiguous way of specifying that the category applies to the Thracians, rather than whoever happened to live in Thrace at some point in time. I suppose it's still possible to misread it, but it seems less likely to be misunderstood than the other alternatives. P Aculeius (talk) 11:48, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems fine. I would be okay with such an Alt Rename. NLeeuw (talk) 16:38, 21 March 2024 (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. (non-admin closure) House Blaster (talk · he/him) 21:22, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Culture of Russia by ethnicity (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:ARBITRARYCAT WP:CROSSCAT. If we want to be accurate, then anything in the Category:Culture by ethnicity tree should not be limited by geography. People of any ethnicity migrate across the world all the time, and their ethnic culture cannot be solely defined by their geographic region of origin if we take diaspora culture seriously. Nobody is in a position to claim all members of an "ethnic" group (however one may define it) currently live in the same geographic area, have always done so, and always will (WP:CRYSTAL), and that any member of the ethnic group outside that area should be discounted (e.g. "A Scotsman living outside Scotland is no true Scotsman" is a claim Wikipedia categorisation cannot accept). Especially in our modern era of high mobility for individual human beings migrating across the planet, and constant demographic shifts, it would be inappropriate to put an ethnic culture in a fixed geographic box. Similarly, the geographic region of origin of an ethnic culture is also (almost) never ethnically homogeneous either; e.g. as of 2021, only 24% of inhabitants of Udmurtia are ethnic Udmurts, so the region isn't the exclusive or even majority domain of the eponymous ethnic group. Ethnicity and geography simply never fully coincide. Follow-up to discussion with @Marcocapelle: about Kalmyk culture vs. Culture of Kalmykia (and Udmurt culture vs. Culture of Udmurtia): Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 3#Category:Kalmyk culture. NLeeuw (talk) 20:40, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for not reading your last comment of yesterday in the other discussion well enough. I had the other way around in mind, culture is mostly ethnicity-related regardless of in which federal subject of Russia people live. It would be very much like subcategories of Category:First Nations culture which aren't based on administrative divisions either. It is not a coincidence that culture of federal subject categories have very few articles directly in it. In any case it should be the subcategories to become nominated, not the top category. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:57, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How do you mean, the subcategories should be nominated? Which ones, and why? NLeeuw (talk) 15:50, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- When you are opposed to categorizing culture by ethnicity (which I am not), you should nominate Category:Kalmyk culture and Category:Udmurt culture and all of their siblings for deletion. Just nominating the parent category does not help. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:50, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  @Marcocapelle Ah, then we misunderstood each other, sorry. I am not opposed to categorising culture by ethnicity. I am opposed to categorising ethnicity by geography. I object to the of Russia part of this catname. I thought you agreed when you said: Considering the mixed ethnic population of many federal subjects, a tree of culture by federal subject does not seem very useful at all. The Federal subjects of Russia are the geographic administrative division of the Russian Federation. And as we seemed to agree, the Kalmyk people and culture do not fully coincide with the Republic of Kalmykia. "Kalmyk culture" does not apply to all people living in Kalmykia (because Almost 2/3 of the population of the federal subject belongs to the ethnic group, therefore 1/3 of the population of Kalmykia are not ethnic Kalmyks), and it does not only apply to Kalmyks living in Kalmykia, but also elsewhere in the world (the Kalmyk diaspora, if you will). We agree on that, don't we? NLeeuw (talk) 14:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 23:35, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We seem to have a lot of agreement. But I still oppose deletion because it would make navigation more difficult for editors who are specifically interested in ethnic minorities of Russia. I am open to a rename although I would not know myself how to improve the name. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:31, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all, as the case for deletion has not been made. Johnbod (talk) 04:21, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; it's useful for those who want to learn about different Russian ethnic groups in a convenient way. Occidental𓍝Phantasmagoria [T/C] 21:48, 20 March 2024 (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) House Blaster (talk · he/him) 11:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Television shows set in Redondo Beach, California to Category:Television shows set in Los Angeles County, California and Category:Redondo Beach, California
Propose merging Category:Television shows set in Glendale, California to Category:Television shows set in Los Angeles County, California and Category:Glendale, California

Nominator's rationale: Per NARROWCAT User:Namiba 12:55, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:10, 19 March 2024 (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) House Blaster (talk · he/him) 11:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Social history of Austria-Hungary to Category:Society of Austria-Hungary

Nominator's rationale: merge, the two categories have the same scope considering that Austria-Hungary is a former country. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Mason (talk) 05:00, 20 March 2024 (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. The opposing argument seems anecdotal, and COMMONNAME applies to articles. not categories. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 20:26, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Anime conventions to Category:Anime and manga conventions

Nominator's rationale: Per the recent move of parent article. We should also rename a bunch of subcategories here (I don't know which script could be used to list them easily here, sorry). Ex: Category:Anime conventions in Canada‎ should be at Category:Anime and manga conventions in Canada‎ _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per WP:C2D. The subcategories may be listed at speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Talk:Anime and manga convention#I have never heard anyone in my life call it an "anime and manga convention" and WP:COMMONNAME. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:11, 21 March 2024 (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.

March 18

Category:21st-century European male musicians

Category:Assassinated Burundian monarchs

Category:Austrian Nazi lawyers

Category:Napoleonic looting of art

Category:American female winemakers

Category:American expatriate male actors in England

Category:Fictional dead characters

Category:Quantum Leap

Category:Horse farms in Spain

Category:Janów Podlaski

Category:Thracian culture

Category:Culture of Russia by ethnicity

Category:People from Ghardaïa

Category:Television shows set in Redondo Beach, California

Category:Drum Corps Associates corps

Category:Social history of Austria-Hungary

Category:Anime conventions