Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 7

September 7

Category:Lists of science fiction television characters by series

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: Reverse merge etc. as described by Fayenatic london. -- Beland (talk) 22:02, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Lists of science fiction television characters by series to Category:Lists of science fiction television characters

Nominator's rationale: They seem to perform the same function --wooden superman 15:31, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reopened and relisted per request.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:20, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you HouseBlaster for extending this discussion. Oppose because the nomination would remove the contents from other valid parents Lists of television characters by series & Science fiction television characters by series. It would be better to move most content down from the target into the nominated cat, even if all that is left is the "by series" subcat. After that, perhaps the parent is not needed, and could be upmerged to all three of its parents. Several other speculative fiction cats could likewise be diffused to subcats; maybe Lists of science fiction characters should only contain a by-series subcat and lists of pirates, robots and gynoids. – Fayenatic London 08:23, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Selective Reverse Merge, per Fayenatic london, above. And Merge what's left to the appropriate subcats of Category:Lists of fictional characters - for example, Category:Lists of fictional characters by species or Category:Lists of fictional characters by occupation. - jc37 21:09, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus yet on merge target, but it will likely require manual cleanup.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 16:25, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move articles per Fayenatic london, and only reverse merge if the former action results in no articles left, again per Fayenatic london. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:36, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 23:08, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse merge per Fayenatic London, because the nominated category fits better with the established structure than the target category. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:04, 8 September 2025 (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:Republic of China

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. No prejudice against speedy renomination. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 16:17, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Republic of China to Category:Taiwan

Nominator's rationale: Taiwan is the widely recognized and commonly used name for the entity governed by the Republic of China (ROC). Using "Taiwan" in categories aligns with common usage and improves clarity for most users navigating Wikipedia's category system. We have two categories for the same thing and Category:Republic of China states that is the category for Taiwan which is the also the same name for the main article on the country. Taiwan is the name of the article. Not Republic of China.

Wikipedia's naming conventions often prioritize common usage for clarity, even when it differs from official names. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:15, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose this way, this is a history category for the period from 1912 to 1949, and is useful as such. It should be a sibling of Category:People's Republic of China and Category:Imperial China. It should be merged to Category:Republic of China (1912–1949) and Taiwan subcategories should be removed. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:11, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can go for merge to Category:Republic of China (1912–1949), but bear in mind that subcats are categorized in relation to the main China category which is a false categorization. For instance, Category:Buddhism in Taiwan is under Category:Buddhism in China. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:46, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:06, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 21:58, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose. They refer to different entities, one of the categories having a clear and neutral well-defined historical scope. No reason to change anything.--2001:8A0:5EAA:BB01:B9DE:A5FB:F49F:99D2 (talk) 12:44, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment IP's only contribution is this discussion and the similar one above. Only sensible solution is the one proposed by Marcocapelle. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:25, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, clearly "Republic of China" is useful as a distinct category for both the former Mainland Chinese and current Taiwanese governments with this name. AHI-3000 (talk) 00:42, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But what about the subcats for this and the PRC below for cats that are not really related to these two main cats? WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:45, 17 September 2025 (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's Republic of China

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. No prejudice against speedy renomination. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 16:18, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:People's Republic of China to Category:China

Nominator's rationale: China is the widely recognized and commonly used name for the entity governed by the People's Republic of China (ROC). Using "China" in categories aligns with common usage and improves clarity for most users navigating Wikipedia's category system. We have two categories for the same thing and China is the name of the article. Not People's Republic of China.

Wikipedia's naming conventions often prioritize common usage for clarity, even when it differs from official names. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:17, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose this way, this is a history category for the period from 1949 to present, and is useful as such. It should be a sibling of Category:Republic of China (1912–1949) and Category:Imperial China. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:07, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Most articles in subcats related to People's Republic is all related to modern China, i.e. Mainland China. So those articles or subcats have to be changed in some way. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:47, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you give an example? Marcocapelle (talk) 16:35, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Category:Military of the People's Republic of China is listed under Category:People's Republic of China. While the People's Liberation Army is the army of China it is not official named the Military of the People's Republic of China or some other variation. We already have Category:People's Liberation Army. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:41, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  I guess most of it can be moved under Category:People's Liberation Army but not for example the ministry of defence or defense companies. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:16, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Right, but those cats can simply be called Defense companies of China. But not under the name of People's Republic of China. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:56, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 18:05, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 21:58, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose just because vernacular language uses the shorter form should not lead us to get rid of this subcategory that has a clear and neutral definition and helps navigation.--2001:8A0:5EAA:BB01:B9DE:A5FB:F49F:99D2 (talk) 12:38, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment IP's only contribution is this discussion and the similar one below. Only sensible solution is the one proposed by Marcocapelle. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:25, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, the PRC is a very distinct period of modern Chinese history that should be differentiated from the ROC and Imperial dynasties before it. AHI-3000 (talk) 00:45, 17 September 2025 (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:Books about the War on Terror

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. Category:Films about the War on Terror renamed to Category:Films about the war on terror as well. (non-admin closure) – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 13:41, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Books about the War on Terror to Category:Books about the war on terror

Nominator's rationale: For consistency with its parent category Category:Works about the war on terror and War on terror. Category needs to match main article. PARAKANYAA (talk) 06:29, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. By the way, a copy of the stale discussion at WP:CFDS is on the category talk page. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:50, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support for consistency. Also similarly rename Category:Films about the War on Terror. Mclay1 (talk) 15:48, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Mclay1's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 21:51, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Of course rename the sibling category too. I have tagged that category page. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:48, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and rename categories the other way around. It’s a phrase coined from a given perspective and used as a proper noun to refer to a given (series of) historical event(s) not about any supposedly-real ’war on [supposedly-real] terror" The cap(s) should remain imv for even stronger reasons than for fictions about World War II, Wars of the Roses, etc. Or use quotation marks (which the article uses, except for its first occurrence in the LS). Renaming the suggested way would not be consistent with conventions as they show in Category:Films by war. Anyway, renaming with no cap letter would be highly controversial and biased, whereas categories should be neutral.--- E.—UX 09:12, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The War on Terror article was moved to war on terror in 2019 as a result of this requested move, in which it was lumped in with other titles like war on cancer, war on poverty, etc. None of the commentators in that RM directly addressed the War on Terror. If we go by Eva UX's above argument that the War on Terror was a specific series of events and a proper noun, then a new requested move should be started to reverse the move for War on Terror, and the categories can speedily follow as C2D. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:04, 8 September 2025 (UTC), 13:07, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for providing that context. Do we agree that the fictions and books in question are about given defined historical events that they portray/describe and not about the idea/political project in general? If so, even (or precisely) by the reasoning of those who wished to rename the article without capitals, the present categories should, as depictions of particular historical events, from my understanding of the debate and naming conventions, have capitals. - E.—UX 13:27, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another solution would be to rename the categories xxxxx about the Global War on Terorism (alternative name, see article) - E.—UX 13:40, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The argument to treat "War on Terror" the a book topic as different from the Wikipedia article topic "war on terror" is going to be hard to make for category titles, given how the default preference around here is usually to follow the article title. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:14, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the default preference around here is usually to follow the article title, yes, if and when the article title refers only to what the categories refer to. Which is not the case here. Again, I am directing interested users to the debate you linked. I also suggest another renaming that would in my opinion avoid any controversy. Again thank you for your help and input. - E.—UX 18:23, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The category is for books about whatever the article war on terror is about. I agree that War on Terror as a proper noun makes more sense, but until the article is renamed (which may never happen considering the multiple past debates about this kind of thing), the categories should match the article. Mclay1 (talk) 14:30, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rename I don't see any good reason to deviate from the article here; I've read Eva UX's comments and am not convinced. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:01, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. I too am not convinced by the above counterargument. Οἶδα (talk) 06:41, 10 September 2025 (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:University of North Texas schools, colleges, and departments

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 and merge. (non-admin closure) – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 13:45, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose Renaming Category:University of North Texas schools, colleges, and departments to Category:University of North Texas colleges and schools

Manually Merge articles that never belonged in this category to Category:University of North Texas

Nominator's rationale: WP:CATNAME and WP:C2C, consistency with established category tree names

No objection to diffusing the UNT category but the proposed rename follows Category:Colleges and schools by university and there aren't any departments in the category anyway. (There are several articles—marching bands, university press, buildings—that never belonged in this category; I could have cleaned that up outside of CFD but I'm nominating the cat as I found it.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:10, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

* Note to Closer: If this passes, just ping me and I'm happy to happy to do the manual work. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:10, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – numbermaniac 06:57, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 21:50, 7 September 2025 (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:21st-century Togolese women engineers

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). – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 13:37, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:21st-century Togolese women engineers to Category:21st-century Togolese engineers

Nominator's rationale: Togolese women engineers doesn't have enough engineers to diffuse this category by century. upmerge for now. ^SMason_Garrison 21:30, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:50, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. LibStar (talk) 04:55, 10 September 2025 (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:Seaside resorts in Florida

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. No consensus to delete. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 16:20, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Seaside resorts in Florida (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Originally created by a banned sockpuppet. The category has no inclusion criteria or scope. 41 of 49 places on this list are cities and towns, not resorts. At least 2 of the resorts aren't even seaside. Another burned down in 1979 and the site is a 7-11. To me, this seems like a duplication of existing categories. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:13, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At least purge cities and towns, and move the two non-seaside resorts to Category:Resorts in Florida. If the category is going to be deleted, then move all 8 articles about resorts to Category:Resorts in Florida. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I was hoping to avoid having to do the 41 edits, but I did purge them. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:05, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:25, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably the subcategories can be purged too. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:46, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 21:02, 7 September 2025 (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:Cathode ray tube

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 26#Category:Cathode ray tube

Category:Vegetable organizations

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 16:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Vegetable organizations (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category is very lightly used, and "all organizations related to vegetables" does not seem to be a useful categorization; it is rather ambiguous (for example, are the Vegetarian Society, PETA, or even the Seventh-Day Adventist Church "vegetable organizations" since they promote eating vegetables instead of animal products? What about gardening organizations?). The two pages directly included could be put under a new Category:Vegetable orchestras or Category:Vegetable music groups. Luke10.27 (talk) 01:37, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're confusing vegetarian and vegetable... Vegetarian diets are not limited to vegetables. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 02:26, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand what a vegetarian diet is; my thought was that one could argue they should be included because switching to a vegetarian diet usually involves eating more vegetables. Now that I've thought about it more, though, it would be quite a stretch to include them, so they aren't the best examples do use. I do still question the usefulness of the category, because the fact that an organization is somehow related to vegetables does not seem to be a classification useful for navigation, but my example in the nomination of vegetarian organizations wasn't a good one. Luke10.27 (talk) 17:39, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Vegetables, vegetable research institutes and vegetable orchestras do not have something in common as a type of organization. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:10, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merging the category does sound like a good idea; what would you think about creating a category for vegetable music groups and making that a subcat of Category:Vegetables? Luke10.27 (talk) 17:42, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- That seems too early for now, the two articles can simply link to each other in the body text of the article. We can always still create a new category when there are a few more articles about vegetable orchestras. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:38, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but I do question the utility of the musical group's inclusion. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:00, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What criteria would you suggest for an organization to be included? Perhaps any organization with a purpose of studying or promoting the growth or consumption of vegetables? Luke10.27 (talk) 17:41, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
yeah I think that more or less works... If I ask myself "Ok so I don't think music groups named after vegetables should in general be in this category... But under what conditions would I include them?" and "a purpose of studying or promoting the growth or consumption of vegetables" would indeed satisfy that for me... With perhaps the caveat that obstructing would be equally as valid as promoting but I can think of no such extant organizations (at least in an encyclopedic sense and not just as their critics would label them). Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:30, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Horse Eyes AHI-3000 (talk) 02:44, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 17:40, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 20:58, 7 September 2025 (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:Wikipedians from İzmir

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 16:44, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians from İzmir (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Contains only users who have been inactive or blocked for years. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:57, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, or merge to Category:Wikipedians in Turkey. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:52, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Grouping users from where they are "from" does not necessarily imply any sort of special knowledge, ability, or interest on collaborating on any particular topic that doesn't violate WP:NOR, and therefore violates WP:USERCAT. VegaDark (talk) 14:25, 9 September 2025 (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:Wikipedians from Westmorland

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#Category:Wikipedians from Westmorland

Category:Wikipedians from Trabzon

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#Category:Wikipedians from Trabzon

Category:Wikipedians from Stryi

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) GoldRomean (talk) 18:35, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians from Stryi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Contains only one user who has been blocked for years. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:57, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Being blocked for years is sufficient reason to remove someone from user categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Grouping users from where they are "from" does not necessarily imply any sort of special knowledge, ability, or interest on collaborating on any particular topic that doesn't violate WP:NOR, and therefore violates WP:USERCAT. VegaDark (talk) 14:24, 9 September 2025 (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:Wikipedians from Paderborn

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) GoldRomean (talk) 18:35, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians from Paderborn (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Contains only userboxes and no actual users. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:57, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Preferably delete the userboxes too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:01, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Grouping users from where they are "from" does not necessarily imply any sort of special knowledge, ability, or interest on collaborating on any particular topic that doesn't violate WP:NOR, and therefore violates WP:USERCAT. VegaDark (talk) 14:24, 9 September 2025 (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:Wikipedians from Oradea

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) GoldRomean (talk) 19:00, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians from Oradea (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Contains only one user who has been inactive for years. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:57, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Wikipedians in Romania, we do not know if the user might return some day. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:03, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Grouping users from where they are "from" does not necessarily imply any sort of special knowledge, ability, or interest on collaborating on any particular topic that doesn't violate WP:NOR, and therefore violates WP:USERCAT. VegaDark (talk) 14:24, 9 September 2025 (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:Wikipedians from Odisha

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) GoldRomean (talk) 19:00, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians from Odisha (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Contains only users who have been inactive of blocked for years. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:57, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, or merge to Category:Odia Wikipedians. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:05, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Grouping users from where they are "from" does not necessarily imply any sort of special knowledge, ability, or interest on collaborating on any particular topic that doesn't violate WP:NOR, and therefore violates WP:USERCAT. VegaDark (talk) 14:24, 9 September 2025 (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:Wikipedians from Kaohsiung

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) GoldRomean (talk) 18:34, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians from Kaohsiung (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Contains only a userbox and now actual users. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:57, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The userbox may be deleted too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:10, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Grouping users from where they are "from" does not necessarily imply any sort of special knowledge, ability, or interest on collaborating on any particular topic that doesn't violate WP:NOR, and therefore violates WP:USERCAT. VegaDark (talk) 14:22, 9 September 2025 (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:Wikipedians from Idaho

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#Category:Wikipedians from Idaho

Category:Wikipedians from Hoyerswerda

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#Category:Wikipedians from Hoyerswerda

Category:Wikipedians from Hertfordshire

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#Category:Wikipedians from Hertfordshire

Category:Wikipedians from Falkirk

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#Category:Wikipedians from Falkirk

Category:Wikipedians from Bozeman, Montana

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) GoldRomean (talk) 16:23, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians from Bozeman, Montana (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Contains only a userbox and no actual users. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:57, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The userbox may be deleted too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:17, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Grouping users from where they are "from" does not necessarily imply any sort of special knowledge, ability, or interest on collaborating on any particular topic that doesn't violate WP:NOR, and therefore violates WP:USERCAT. VegaDark (talk) 14:21, 9 September 2025 (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:Wikipedians from Blackpool

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#Category:Wikipedians from Blackpool

Category:Wikipedians from Baden

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#Category:Wikipedians from Baden

Category:Wikipedians from Ayrshire

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#Category:Wikipedians from Ayrshire

Category:Wikipedians from Aschaffenburg

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) GoldRomean (talk) 16:24, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians from Aschaffenburg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Pointless user category - contains only a userbox. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:29, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The userbox may be deleted as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:22, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Grouping users from where they are "from" does not necessarily imply any sort of special knowledge, ability, or interest on collaborating on any particular topic that doesn't violate WP:NOR, and therefore violates WP:USERCAT. VegaDark (talk) 14:18, 9 September 2025 (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:Photoplay Awards film of the year winners

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 20#Category:Photoplay Awards film of the year winners

Category:Claude Cat 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. (non-admin closure) – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 14:20, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Claude Cat films (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Hubie and Bertie films (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Sylvester Jr. films (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Witch Hazel (Looney Tunes) films (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: They were never major characters in the Looney Tunes franchise. Sorry. 2001:569:7694:FB00:A4CE:27B8:E55A:F3D5 (talk) 22:25, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 14:21, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you clarify? Do you mean that none of these characters has ever made a major appearance? –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:02, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:49, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose No actual rationale offered for the deletion. Dimadick (talk) 02:20, 16 September 2025 (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:Fictional prison escapees

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 16:49, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Fictional prison escapees to Category:Fictional fugitives

Nominator's rationale: Being a prison escapee is arguably not defining, as evidenced from the fact that there is no real-life version of this category. While being a fugitive might be, specifically having escaped from prison is merely a plot element of the story. I suggest merging to Category:Fictional fugitives. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger. There's a significant distinction between a suspected criminal fleeing to avoid prosecution and imprisonment, and a convicted prisoner escaping from incarceration. And why merge with Category:Fictional fugitives instead of Category:Fictional prisoners and detainees, which would be a better fit? Also, your claim that there wasn't a real-life version of this category is incorrect, as we already have Category:Escapees, which is all about people who escaped from prison. AHI-3000 (talk) 17:48, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Escapees is less specific than "prison" escapees, which is the point here. That is analogous with fugitives.

Category:Fictional prisoners and detainees implies they are defined by being a prisoner while "escapee/fugitive" means the defining aspect of them is that they are a former prisoner. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:06, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From Category:Escapees introduction: "Escapees are people who are famous for an escape from a detention in places like prisons, POW camps or penal colonies." It think it's quite clear that Category:Fictional prison escapees is indeed the appropriate fictional counterpart for the real-life parent category.

I still argue that Category:Fictional prisoners and detainees has a closer relationship to this category than Category:Fictional fugitives, as there's a common thread of them being prison inmates; the fugitives category is more suited for characters fleeing from arrest and prosecution without needing to having been detained first. AHI-3000 (talk) 05:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 14:30, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:44, 7 September 2025 (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:Burials in Santarém 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 to Category:Burials in Portugal. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 16:12, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Burials in Santarém District to Category:Burials in Portugal

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:58, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 14:34, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:39, 7 September 2025 (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:Burials in Romania by populated place

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) GoldRomean (talk) 16:24, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Burials in Romania by populated place to Category:Burials in Romania and Category:Burials by populated place

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 14:34, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:39, 7 September 2025 (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:Austrian blind pianists

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 Any sibling categories can be brought to new nominations. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:18, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Austrian blind pianists to Category:Blind pianists and Category:Austrian blind musicians

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Underpopulated category. There's no need to diffuse by nationality+specific disability+specific instrument ^SMason_Garrison 03:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Considered alone, this should probably be kept since it follows a larger pattern of categorisation. The tree of these triple intersections should probably be discussed in its entirety. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 03:38, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, regardless of the fate of the (very few) sibling categories. Having said that, there are only some 100 articles about blind pianists in total, so I would support merging the siblings too. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:44, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(I was also talking about the "siblings" in other Category:Blind musicians subcategories, FTR.) 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 14:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Large nominations across different intersection like this this tend to end in no consensus. it's to hard evaluate the merits. The question here is whether nationality is needed for diffusion. ^SMason_Garrison 22:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 14:40, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on the sibling cats?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:38, 7 September 2025 (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:Connective/soft tissue tumors and sarcomas

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:Connective and soft tissue neoplasms. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 16:24, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Connective/soft tissue tumors and sarcomas to Category:Connective and soft tissue neoplasms

Nominator's rationale: These seem to be very similar if not identical in scope (and unless I'm misunderstanding, the inclusion of these categories should be reversed if both should exist). The latter name is more in line with the other subcategories of Category:Types of neoplasia. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 02:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 14:41, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:34, 7 September 2025 (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:West Antarctica micronations

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 28#Category:West Antarctica micronations

Category:Vietnamese heavy metal musical groups

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: Dual merge * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:18, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Vietnamese heavy metal musical groups (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Two recently created 1-article categories for the same article. Gjs238 (talk) 12:21, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably merge to Category:Heavy metal musical groups, unless there is a specific reason to remove the article from this tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:21, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 11:53, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Vietnamese rock music groups and Category:Heavy metal musical groups Gjs238 (talk) 16:21, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:11, 7 September 2025 (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.

A-League Men winning coaches and players

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 Kaffet i halsen's proposal can be brought to a new nomination. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:17, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose delete Category:A-League Men–winning head coaches (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose delete Category:A-League Men championship–winning head coaches (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose delete Category:A-League Men premiership–winning head coaches (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose delete Category:A-League Men–winning players (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose delete Category:A-League Men championship–winning players (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose delete Category:A-League Men premiership–winning players (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Some discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Category:A-League Men winners, with support to delete players and coaches categories. Being a winning coach or player of this event is WP:NOTDEFINING and probably falls under WP:OCASSOC too. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:16, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Agree with WP:NOTDEFINING and WP:OCASSOC. Matilda Maniac (talk) 21:46, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Should we take the subcategories of Category:National association football champions into consideration too? FastCube (talk) 03:23, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see, there are no other winning players or winning managers categories there. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 19:12, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non-defining and I would also merge Category:A-League Men–winning clubs to Category:A-League Men winners OR Category:A-League Men winners to Category:Australian men's soccer champions for less layers. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 09:43, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Might be good to instead merge to Category:A-League Men managers and Category:A-League Men players respectively. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 13:08, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Kaffet i halsen's proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:10, 7 September 2025 (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:Vietnamese nu metal musical groups

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: Dual merge * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:16, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Vietnamese nu metal musical groups (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Recently created 1-article category. Merge to parent(s). Gjs238 (talk) 15:49, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't it be merged to Category:Nu metal musical groups? Marcocapelle (talk) 17:37, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Category:Nu metal musical groups Gjs238 (talk) 23:33, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:09, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Nu metal musical groups and Vietnamese heavy metal musical groups. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:14, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Nu metal musical groups and Vietnamese heavy metal musical groups. Gjs238 (talk) 12:33, 23 September 2025 (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:Russian-language musical groups from Germany

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). – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 13:52, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Russian-language musical groups from Germany to Category:Russian-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:German-language musical groups from Italy to Category:German-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:French-language musical groups from Japan to Category:French-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:Italian-language musical groups from Latvia to Category:Italian-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:Spanish-language musical groups of the Netherlands to Category:Spanish-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:German-language musical groups from Poland to Category:German-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:Russian-language musical groups from Poland to Category:Russian-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:English-language musical groups from Portugal to Category:English-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:Spanish-language musical groups of Romania to Category:Spanish-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:Spanish-language musical groups of Serbia to Category:Spanish-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:French-language musical groups from South Africa to Category:French-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:French-language musical groups from Spain to Category:French-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:Italian-language musical groups from Spain to Category:Italian-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:French-language musical groups from Ukraine to Category:French-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:Italian-language musical groups from the United Kingdom to Category:Italian-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:Russian-language musical groups from the United Kingdom to Category:Russian-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:Spanish-language musical groups from the United Kingdom to Category:Spanish-language musical groups
Propose merging Category:Russian-language musical groups from the United States to Category:Russian-language musical groups

Nominator's rationale: Only one article per language–nationality musical group intersection. All articles are already in a nationality–category, e.g. Category:German industrial music groups, Category:Italian symphonic metal musical groups et cetera. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 13:07, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:40, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 19:04, 7 September 2025 (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:Wikipedians from Little Rock, Arkansas

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) GoldRomean (talk) 18:33, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians from Little Rock, Arkansas (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of Category:Wikipedians in Little Rock, Arkansas. No need to merge as the sole member has been inactive since 2009. This will empty Category:Wikipedians from Arkansas. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:38, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Category:Wikipedians from Little Rock, Arkansas and Wikipedians from Arkansas per nomination. Category:Wikipedians in Little Rock, Arkansas may also be eligible because the two users in there have also been inactive for a number of years (one since 2021, the other since 2010). QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:23, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Grouping users from where they are "from" does not necessarily imply any sort of special knowledge, ability, or interest on collaborating on any particular topic that doesn't violate WP:NOR, and therefore violates WP:USERCAT. VegaDark (talk) 14:17, 9 September 2025 (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:It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia characters

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:It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia. I have purged the redirects. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 18:58, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia characters to Category:It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia

Nominator's rationale: Only contains one non-redirect article. (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:33, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom but purge the redirects since they all link to the same list. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:45, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and purge per Marcocapelle. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:25, 7 September 2025 (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:Lists of Bangladesh cricket records and statistics

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:Lists of Bangladeshi cricket records and statistics. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 18:33, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Lists of Bangladesh cricket records and statistics to Category:Lists of Bangladeshi cricket records and statistics

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate categories; target is named in the style of similar categories. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 16:42, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, it is a sort of a WP:C2C nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:53, 7 September 2025 (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.

Monasteries by populated place

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 Category:Monasteries in London can be moved boldly (and I'll do so), but is not a formal result of this discussion. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:16, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Monasteries in England by populated place to Category:Monasteries by populated place
Propose merging Category:Monasteries in Russia by populated place to Category:Monasteries by populated place and Category:Monasteries in Russia
Propose merging Category:Monasteries in Ukraine by populated place to Category:Monasteries by populated place and Category:Monasteries in Ukraine

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary layers with just 2 sub-cats each. – Fayenatic London 21:49, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, and Category:Monasteries in London should also manually moved under Category:Roman Catholic monasteries in England or Category:Monasteries in England. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:24, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 15:56, 7 September 2025 (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:Audiographers from Kerala

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 * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:15, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Audiographers from Kerala to Category:Film people from Kerala

Nominator's rationale: There is not an Category:Audiographers tree ^SMason_Garrison 11:39, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We do have a tree for Category:Sound designers though. Maybe rename to Category:Sound designers from Kerala? Marcocapelle (talk) 16:12, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the context of India, I cannot find the difference between the seemingly interchangeable "audiographers" (Nandi Award for Best Audiographer, Tamil Nadu State Film Award for Best Audiographer), "Sound designers", "Sound recordists", "Re-recording mixers" etc. However, 22 of the 25 articles in the audiographer category are also categorized in to the Indian sound designers parent category. The other three appear to also be sound designers. I would support a rename. Οἶδα (talk) 03:48, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on renaming?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 15:21, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Film people from Kerala. All 25 articles in the category are now categorized under Indian sound designers. I don't see any need for intersection by country subdivision. Οἶδα (talk) 08:19, 9 September 2025 (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:Deputy chairmen of the Rajya Sabha

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 to rename And I've moved the article back. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:14, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Deputy chairmen of the Rajya Sabha (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category is empty TheSlumPanda (talk) 07:53, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This was out-of-process emptying. Merge Category:Deputy Chairpersons of the Rajya Sabha back to Category:Deputy chairmen of the Rajya Sabha, then possibly start a renaming discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:41, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle Yes. I didn’t find the move button on category page thats why I created a new category TheSlumPanda (talk) 11:26, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheSlumPanda You should propose the move, not do it yourself. ^SMason_Garrison 11:40, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've restored the category contents ^SMason_Garrison 11:43, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison can you guide me for proposing a move TheSlumPanda (talk) 11:45, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You literally do it here. But what you should be proposing is a rename of the existing category. ^SMason_Garrison 11:48, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Deputy Chairpersons of the Rajya Sabha has been emptied. It's hard to follow here whether or not that is the problem or the solution. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:17, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheSlumPanda: you may now start a fresh proposal to rename Category:Deputy chairmen of the Rajya Sabha to Category:Deputy chairpersons of the Rajya Sabha (with a c rather than a C), if you can demonstrate that this office is really called deputy chairperson by reliable sources. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:17, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
TheSlumPanda has started a fresh discussion indeed. So this discussion may be closed now without action. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:33, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Category:Deputy Chairpersons of the Rajya Sabha is still an empty category. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:20, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged it as empty now. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:04, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Proedurally closed Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 6#Category:Deputy chairmen of the Rajya Sabha. Discussion about renaming can/should continue here. GoldRomean (talk) 00:21, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename to Category:Deputy chairpersons of the Rajya Sabha?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 15:20, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Deputy chairmen of the Rajya Sabha to Category:Deputy Chairpersons of the Rajya Sabha

Nominator's rationale: This category should be renamed to the suggested target category as the article was also renamed previously TheSlumPanda (talk) 05:56, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TheSlumPanda: please provide reliable sources for this rename. Otherwise the article should be moved back. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:46, 26 August 2025 (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:Peruvian women judges

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:Peruvian women lawyers and Category:Women judges. (non-admin closure) – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 13:54, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Peruvian women judges to Category:Peruvian women lawyers, Category:Women judges and Category:Peruvian judges

Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 02:48, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LibStar have you tried to populate it? ^SMason_Garrison 04:52, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There aren't any other articles about women in the tree of Category:Peruvian judges. But dual merge to Category:Peruvian women judges to Category:Peruvian women lawyers only, because the article is already in Category:21st-century Peruvian judges. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:26, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support dual merge as above. LibStar (talk) 05:36, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 15:16, 7 September 2025 (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:Korean writing system

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 Uncontested for more than a month. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:13, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Korean writing system to Category:Korean writing systems

Nominator's rationale: Category title doesn't match current scope. It currently includes every Korean writing system, past and present, as well as romanization systems. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 20:08, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Romanization is an issue here because that has its own subcategory Category:Romanization of Korean. That subcategory as a whole may be moved to directly under Category:Korean language though. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:29, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can see that, but "Korean writing system" singular seems odd for this. There were multiple since antiquity and even currently grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 00:59, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 15:16, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 15:14, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just for clarity, I am not opposing this nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:55, 7 September 2025 (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:Ancient Mithila University

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 no conmments on the alternate proposal, hence it's uncontested, and in a dispute between two options of equal support I'm inclined to choose the less destructive one, hence rename rather than delete. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:12, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Ancient Mithila University (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: No such university by the name of "Ancient Mithila University" has ever existed. This is not a term used in scholarship nor is there any sources to support any such institution. Ixudi (talk) 20:41, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Sanskrit and Vedic learning in Mithila, similar to article space where Ancient Mithila University redirects to Sanskrit and Vedic learning in Mithila. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:15, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 15:16, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 15:13, 7 September 2025 (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:T-pop singers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 26#Category:T-pop singers

Category:Cultural depictions of Michael Bay

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) GoldRomean (talk) 18:30, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Cultural depictions of Michael Bay to Category:Michael Bay

Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. underpopulated category ^SMason_Garrison 13:55, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just delete, not a defining characteristic of the only article. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:12, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 15:16, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 14:34, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Marcocapelle. Bay only gets a brief mention in the plot summary, which I take to mean he isn't in the episode for long/as a main character. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:28, 7 September 2025 (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:Wikipedians from Kochi

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:Indian Wikipedians. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 18:23, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Wikipedians from Kochi to Category:Indian Wikipedians

Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. underpopulated category ^SMason_Garrison 13:16, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge in addition to the nominator's concerns the whole "Wikipedians from" tree is of dubious merit. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:35, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. Grouping users from where they are "from" does not necessarily imply any sort of special knowledge, ability, or interest on collaborating on any particular topic that doesn't violate WP:NOR, and therefore violates WP:USERCAT. VegaDark (talk) 14:16, 9 September 2025 (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.

Misplaced comment

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: Sticking a close box on this so it doesn't appear in the bot's list of old unclosed discussions. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:27, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete this category, because I want to keep it forever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterLGreen1996 (talk • contribs) 06:32, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PeterLGreen1996: if you want to participate in a deletion discussion then please go to that particular discussion. However "I want to keep it forever" is not an argument that anyone will take seriously (see WP:ATA, section WP:ILIKEIT). Marcocapelle (talk) 10:56, 7 September 2025 (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:Burial sites of the Samanid dynasty

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) GoldRomean (talk) 18:24, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Burial sites of the Samanid dynasty to Category:Burial sites of Iranian dynasties, Category:Burial sites of Sunni dynasties and Category:Samanids
Propose merging Category:Burial sites of the Ziyarid dynasty to Category:Burial sites of Iranian dynasties, Category:Burial sites of Shia dynasties and Category:Ziyarid dynasty

Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article in each category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:32, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 05:36, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge for Now per WP:NARROWCAT. - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:44, 7 September 2025 (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:Burial sites of the House of Lorraine

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: Category:Burial sites of the House of Metz. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 18:18, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Burial sites of the House of Lorraine to Category:Burial sites of the House of Metz

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:54, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 05:36, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Extra layer hinders navigation instead of aiding it. - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:44, 7 September 2025 (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:18th-century Polish–Lithuanian landowners

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. This really needs more participation, so renomination after a suitable time period would likely be a good idea to get consensus for either keeping or merging. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:56, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:18th-century Polish–Lithuanian landowners to Category:18th-century Polish–Lithuanian nobility

Nominator's rationale: merge, nobility is the defining characteristic here, land ownership is merely a side effect. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:32, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. reopening. This needs some discussion. I'm neutral, but I don't want this category to be redirected for template maintence reasons. @Left guide:. Please relist if there's not discussion after a week. ^SMason_Garrison 04:49, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The more I think about this, the more I'm coming around to opposing. Not all nobility owned land, and several of these individuals are notable for being women landowners. ^SMason_Garrison 04:58, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 04:50, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 05:32, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/Merge for different reasons. Clicked through the articles, and they generally mention having "estates". I'm not sure if that's independently notable from being nobility but, if so, this would have to be about being large landowners not just yeoman farmers. I don't see a way to have a "large landowners" cat without being subjective. - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:50, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have meanwhile added the articles to the nobility tree, so the original merge proposal has now become equivalent to a deletion proposal. Hence support deletion. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:02, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Smasongarrison: Thoughts on this argument? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:22, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again I'm not convinced because no one has really address the intersection aspect here. Being the head of an estate is a defining feature for female nobility as its not very common. ^SMason_Garrison 22:02, 26 September 2025 (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:Seine-Saint-Denis geography stubs

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:Île-de-France geography stubs. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 12:48, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Seine-Saint-Denis geography stubs to Category:Île-de-France geography stubs

Nominator's rationale: Should also be upmerged into Geography of Seine-Saint-Denis, as this stub category has less than 60 mainspace articles in it... - OpalYosutebito 『talk』『articles I want to eat』 16:24, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Single merge to Category:Île-de-France geography stubs. Don't merge to Geography of Seine-Saint-Denis since the articles are already in subcategories thereof. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:31, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 12:52, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 05:30, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Single Merge Per Marcocapelle. - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:51, 7 September 2025 (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:19th-century Nepalese painters

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: Dual merge with Singapore alt * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:21, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:19th-century Nepalese painters to Category:19th-century painters and Category:19th-century Nepalese artists
Propose merging Category:19th-century Surinamese painters to Category:19th-century painters and Category:19th-century Surinamese artists
Propose merging Category:19th-century Singaporean painters to Category:19th-century painters and Category:19th-century Singaporean artists

Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. underpopulated category ^SMason_Garrison 13:33, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge per nom. Singaporese and Surinamese may be added to the nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:34, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added and tagged suggested cats ^SMason_Garrison 15:57, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - You've both overlooked the need to also merge these cats to their other parents: Category:Nepalese painters, Category:Singaporean painters, and Category:Surinamese painters, respectively. Anomalous+0 (talk) 09:08, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, @Smasongarrison, Category:19th-century Singaporean artists doesn't exist and if created would only have 1 article after the merge. ~~(Also, I assume you agree with the additional merge targets suggested by Anomalous+0?)~~ I see the articles are already in the categories. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:20, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My thinking at the time of nomination was to convert Category:19th-century Singaporean painters into Category:19th-century Singaporean artists. But now that I have tried tried and failed to find any additional artists, I guess we should just merge to Category:19th-century Singaporean people instead. ^SMason_Garrison 23:00, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Smasongarrison's proposal? Noting also that the ___ artists cats are all either deleted or relatively empty.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 05:17, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dual Merge/Alt for Singapore Dual merge as nominated with change to Category:19th-century Singaporean people per the comment above. Clear WP:NARROWCAT.- RevelationDirect (talk) 12:53, 7 September 2025 (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 by district in Norway

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 20#Category:People by district in Norway

Jewish buildings

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) GoldRomean (talk) 12:49, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Jewish buildings to Category:Jewish buildings and structures
Propose renaming Category:Jewish buildings by country to Category:Jewish buildings and structures by country
Propose renaming Category:Lists of Judaism-related buildings and structures to Category:Lists of Jewish buildings and structures

Nominator's rationale: Since Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_March_21#Places_of_worship the main categories use "religious buildings and structures" rather than "places of worship". Within Category:Religious buildings and structures by religion, most religion' categories just use "buildings", but "and structures" would better accommodate Category:Jewish monuments and memorials. – Fayenatic London 15:23, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:34, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Rename per WP:C2C, consistency with established category tree names. - RevelationDirect (talk) 12:55, 7 September 2025 (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:Mythopoeia

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) GoldRomean (talk) 18:16, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nominator's rationale: Category seems incredibly broad and can encompass most works of fiction that have some degree of "fictional universe". Due to how vague it is, I can't see how it's particularly helpful. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:20, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is also reflected in the incoherently broad actual contents. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 23:16, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Either delete, or keep and purge. If this category has any actual definition that's not too vague, clearly it's become way too damn broad in scope. For starters, remove every fictional universe and media franchise in it, assuming this category is even worth keeping in the first place. AHI-3000 (talk) 07:05, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - pretty sure that when I created this category in September 2006 (nearly 19 years ago!) it did not contain all these articles. I have a vague curiosity about what it did contain, but is there still no way to work out what categories looked like in the past (despite them being a dynamic page)? The ones that would sort of fit are: Mythopoeia, Mythopoeic Awards, Mythopoeic Society, Mythopoeic thought, Mythopoetic men's movement. Um. Those last two are a bit left-field! It probably had Category:Middle-earth, Category:Mythopoeic writers and possibly The Lord of the Rings. You could manage a category like this, but it would almost certainly bloat again over time. Carcharoth (talk) 22:02, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If we're to have this cat it should be narrowly defined to include only articles *about* Mythopoeia, the process of creating myth itself. As Carcharoth says, that will contain only a handful of articles. If folks want that outcome, we simply purge the current list of books and films, tighten the definition, and apply it to the few articles that discuss aspects of Mythopoeia. Or, it might be better to rename it "Mythopoeic process" to avoid a repeat bloat, in which case we can just delete the existing cat. Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:49, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Mythopoetic is different again. Not the same as Mythopoeia (popularised in the 1930s). Mythopoeic thought is an interesting use of the word (coined in the 1940s). I think Category:Mythopoeic writers also needs attention (but not by me, sorry). Carcharoth (talk) 12:35, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:24, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, we might later create a very small category for Mythopoeic process but this rambling indiscriminate mess of anything that could at a pinch be said to involve a bit of mythopoeia isn't it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:24, 7 September 2025 (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.

Marvelous Entertainment 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: merge. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 12:48, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging: Category:Marvelous Entertainment to Category:Marvelous (company)
Propose merging: Category:Marvelous Entertainment games to Category:Marvelous (company) games

Nominator's rationale: Marvelous Entertainment still exists as the merged entity that is Marvelous, not a separate company.VenezuelanSpongeBobFan2004 (talk) 16:43, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:22, 7 September 2025 (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:Recurring elements in folklore

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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 17:07, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Recurring elements in folklore (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, the content is not specifically about folklore (rather about fiction in general) and it is a mishmash of elements, motifs and characters. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:45, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague cat per nom--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:48, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in the absence of any clear universal unambiguous reproducible scientific account of where the lines come between folklore and fiction. Ditto elements, motifs and characters. Recurring elements in folklore is a useful generalisation that encompasses what are admittedly some very fuzzy ideas that are frequently used in folkloristic studies. Without this category, we could easily end up with a number of new ones, each containing overlapping subsets of the current category, accompanied by endless debate about what belongs where. --Northernhenge (talk) 21:53, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 13:48, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:18, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Hilst's explanation. Dimadick (talk) 02:23, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Dimadick AHI-3000 (talk) 00:31, 17 September 2025 (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:Burial sites of the House of Bourbon (Spain)

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) GoldRomean (talk) 12:47, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Burial sites of the House of Bourbon (Spain) to Category:Burial sites of the House of Bourbon and Category:House of Bourbon (Spain)

Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:24, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:18, 7 September 2025 (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:Wikipedia categories named after Indonesian composers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 20#Category:Wikipedia categories named after Indonesian composers

Category:Russian Academy of Natural Sciences

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) GoldRomean (talk) 18:27, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Russian Academy of Natural Sciences (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This cat and its subcats must be deleted because its 'main' page was deleted for nonnotability. --Altenmann >talk 20:27, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:16, 7 September 2025 (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:Jewish Community Centers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 20#Category:Jewish Community Centers

Category:Nigerian metalsmiths

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 20#Category:Nigerian metalsmiths

Category:Over-the-counter drugs by country

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 20#Category:Over-the-counter drugs by country

Category:Taoist buildings

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:Taoist buildings and structures. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 16:21, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Taoist buildings to Category:Taoist buildings and structures

Nominator's rationale: Contains temples and grottoes; the latter are not buildings. – Fayenatic London 15:54, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:06, 7 September 2025 (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:Bahá'í buildings

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:Bahá'í buildings and structures. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 16:22, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Bahá'í buildings to Category:Bahá'í buildings and structures

Nominator's rationale: I have restructured the contents, which now include Category:Bahá'í holy sites which includes Category:Bahá'í gardens. See also #Jewish buildings below. – Fayenatic London 15:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:06, 7 September 2025 (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:Burial sites of the House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies

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) GoldRomean (talk) 12:49, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Burial sites of the House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies to Category:Burial sites of the House of Bourbon, Category:House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies and Category:Burial sites of Sicilian royal houses

Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:05, 7 September 2025 (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:Military history of Kismayo

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:History of Kismayo. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 12:43, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Military history of Kismayo to Category:History of Kismayo

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:24, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:05, 7 September 2025 (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:Cancer-related timelines

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:History of cancer. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 12:44, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Cancer-related timelines to Category:History of cancer

Nominator's rationale: rename, populate and re-parent, by expanding its scope the category can be better populated. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:53, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 04:05, 7 September 2025 (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:Odonyms referring to a building

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. Unfortunately being interesting doesn't make it suitable for a category. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkl talk 16:58, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose Deleting Category:Odonyms referring to a building
Propose Deleting Category:Odonyms referring to religion

Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING and the spirit of WP:SHAREDNAME

These categories group roads based on whether they were named after a building or something religious. Name origins can be interesting and worth including in the article but this doesn't seem defining. I'm struggling to picture a Wikipedia reader who would want a direct navigational pathway between, say, Amen Corner, London, Imam Khomeini Street, Temple Street, Hong Kong, and Chapel Street, Melbourne. - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:37, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:02, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I created the categories because I find those name origins interesting and thought it would be helpful for others for navigation. The links between streets and religion, and streets and architecture. Moondragon21 (talk) 10:06, 7 September 2025 (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:Writers of pessimistic fiction

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) GoldRomean (talk) 12:42, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose Deleting Category:Writers of pessimistic fiction

Nominator's rationale: WP:SUBJECTIVECAT and WP:NPOV

I personally find Albert Camus and Kurt Vonnegut pessimistic but not Samuel Beckett or H. G. Wells, but this category only agrees with my opinions 50% of the time. (Camus and Beckett are in, Vonnegut and Wells are out.) All 4 of my example articles discuss to what extent the authors are pessimistic, but that seems like a really general adjective. If Pessimistic fiction is a recognized fiction genre, starting with a well-sourced article could better ground any future category with less subjective inclusion criteria. - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:37, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:03, 7 September 2025 (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.

September 7

Category:Lists of science fiction television characters by series

Category:Republic of China

Category:People's Republic of China

Category:Books about the War on Terror

Category:University of North Texas schools, colleges, and departments

Category:21st-century Togolese women engineers

Category:Seaside resorts in Florida

Category:Cathode ray tube

Category:Vegetable organizations

Category:Wikipedians from İzmir

Category:Wikipedians from Westmorland

Category:Wikipedians from Trabzon

Category:Wikipedians from Stryi

Category:Wikipedians from Paderborn

Category:Wikipedians from Oradea

Category:Wikipedians from Odisha

Category:Wikipedians from Northamptonshire

Category:Wikipedians from Netishyn

Category:Wikipedians from Maranhão

Category:Wikipedians from Kaohsiung

Category:Wikipedians from Idaho

Category:Wikipedians from Hoyerswerda

Category:Wikipedians from Hertfordshire

Category:Wikipedians from Falkirk

Category:Wikipedians from Bozeman, Montana

Category:Wikipedians from Blackpool

Category:Wikipedians from Baden

Category:Wikipedians from Ayrshire

Category:Wikipedians from Aschaffenburg

Category:Photoplay Awards film of the year winners

Category:Claude Cat films

Category:Fictional prison escapees

Category:Burials in Santarém District

Category:Burials in Romania by populated place

Category:Austrian blind pianists

Category:Connective/soft tissue tumors and sarcomas

Category:West Antarctica micronations

Category:Vietnamese heavy metal musical groups

A-League Men winning coaches and players

Category:Vietnamese nu metal musical groups

Category:Russian-language musical groups from Germany

Category:Wikipedians from Little Rock, Arkansas

Category:It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia characters

Category:Lists of Bangladesh cricket records and statistics

Monasteries by populated place

Category:Audiographers from Kerala

Category:Deputy chairmen of the Rajya Sabha

Category:Peruvian women judges

Category:Korean writing system

Category:Ancient Mithila University

Category:T-pop singers

Category:Cultural depictions of Michael Bay

Category:Wikipedians from Kochi

Misplaced comment

Category:Burial sites of the Samanid dynasty

Category:Burial sites of the House of Lorraine

Category:18th-century Polish–Lithuanian landowners

Category:Seine-Saint-Denis geography stubs

Category:19th-century Nepalese painters

Category:People by district in Norway

Jewish buildings

Category:Mythopoeia

Marvelous Entertainment categories

Category:Recurring elements in folklore

Category:Burial sites of the House of Bourbon (Spain)

Category:Wikipedia categories named after Indonesian composers

Category:Russian Academy of Natural Sciences

Category:Jewish Community Centers

Category:Nigerian metalsmiths

Category:Over-the-counter drugs by country

Category:Taoist buildings

Category:Bahá'í buildings

Category:Burial sites of the House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies

Category:Military history of Kismayo

Category:Cancer-related timelines

Category:Odonyms referring to a building

Category:Writers of pessimistic fiction