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.
Nominator's rationale:merge for now, only one article in the category, without objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:40, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Oppose Unfinished work. No longer only redirects. There may be more existing articles if/when I find them, and there will be more as and when some of those redirects are expanded. There will also probably be more redirects as I find them or create them. Incidentally, is there a rule against categories of redirects? If so, please link me to it Those redirects are (or should be) WP:SUBTOPICCATs. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood(talk): 17:23, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Categories are meant to link related articles between them. That's the only thing they're useful for: be a navigation tool. Categories made of redirect do not show up at the bottom of the articles. There are some exceptional cases in which they can be useful, per WP:RCAT, but most of the time this should be avoided if possible. Place Clichy (talk) 08:33, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The 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:Dominican Republic people of European American descent
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.
Nominator's rationale: Sportswriters and sports broadcasters have their own seperate categories. These should be split between them. And rename the lists categories because they are misleading; they are all lists of broadcasters, not writers and broadcasters. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:14, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, this nomination is about splitting sportswriters and commentators into seperate categories, and clearly not about whether the term "broadcasters", "announcers", or "commentators" should be used. That is a VERY different discussion and, if you want, we can discuss it that AFTER this Cfd is closed. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:34, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would note that there is, in fact, already seperate Cfd open on the matter. So please keep the "should it be announcers or commentators" questions to that one. Making this enquiry here risks derailing this Cfd which, as I mentioned above, is about splitting sportswriters and broadcasters, not renaming "commentators" to "announcers". That is a seperate conversation. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TSventon, the only thing to ask here is whether you support the purpose of this nomination. I'll change the name for the "List" category but I won't for the main category. I have given my reasons for why I chose "announcers" and I think that I went about it the right way. Which term to use should be dealt seperately.
@TSventon, would appreciate you clearing up whether you are for or against this nomination. I think it is quite fair when I say that we can open a Cfd on what horse race callers are called after this Cfd is done. Because the sooner this one is wrapped up, the faster we can get to that. If you support it please say so and if you are neutral, please say that. Thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:07, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:FIBA Europe Championship navigational boxes
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.
Nominator's rationale:WP:OCYEAR: avoid creating a category tree of individual by year categories with very few members, So for example, instead of grouping by year, group by decade. And then diffuse the by decade categories by year only when necessary. This tree doesn't need to be diffused by year for the nominated categories. Upmerge. –Aidan721 (talk) 21:34, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to the upmerge, but I think we should add the "Category:
Educational organizations established i1XXX" to the upmerge since those categories also have very few items (all the random categories I checked had only the libraries established in as content).DGtal (talk) 21:47, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you, but think it'd be better served by a separate discussion. However, I won't object to doing that in this discussion if consensus agrees. –Aidan721 (talk) 21:57, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are 23 articles in the 16th century and 26 articles in the 17th century. I most certainly would not state that diffusing that by decade or year is necessary by any means as clearly stated in WP:OCYEAR. Articles are perfectly accessible to be found in the century-level or Educational orgs tree. Navigation is severely inhibited by the current structure. The 13-15th centuries only have a century level and seem perfectly found. –Aidan721 (talk) 21:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that'd be useful though. In my response to Dimadick, I said there are just 23 in the 16th century and 26 in the 17th century. Diffusing by decade is not necessary there. When/if the category grows, then it should then be diffused by decade. –Aidan721 (talk) 13:40, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The 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:Fiction set on centaurs (small Solar System bodies)
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 above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Seems to be something of a WP:SHAREDNAME situation. Why do we have to classify as "teams", specifically, as a subset of organizations? Sports teams have absolutely nothing to do with superhero teams, and it's a stretch to even call Santa Claus's reindeer a "team". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:13, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:merge, there is too little distinction between the two categories since most fictional characters are humanoid at least to some extent. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:31, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Largely because it doesn't contain almost anything that is solely a fictional ethnic group and not a race. Category:Mythological peoples doesn't count, as mythology is not typically classified under fiction. Everything is already classified under races that would actually fit, the remainder is too small to form a category. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:41, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Delete - Violates WP:USERCAT as a category with extremely limited use for collaboration; the article's talk page is a better place to collaborate on any content related to this game. VegaDark (talk) 21:29, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Oppose: I see the reasoning, but I don't think it's a useful change. "MBTA" and the fully name are equally common; most categories and pages use the shortened form, including Category:MBTA bus, MBTA bus, List of MBTA bus routes, and so on. There are currently 5 [non-redirect] articles in the category, not just 3, and there will be more as I flesh out the more significant routes into full articles.Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:19, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Support. While there are some other bus routes in the Boston area, none of them are likely to ever have individual articles (versus coverage in the articles about bus systems). Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:22, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Accidents and incidents involving the Beechcraft Bonanza
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 above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Per a previous CfD in 2019. Much too broad as inclusion only seems to be determined by a year. I am not sure why the actresses subcategory wasn’t included in the earlier discussion so I am adding both here for a new discussion rather than request a G4 speedy. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me00:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:merge for now to all parent categories, only one article in the category. This is without objection to recreate the category when some more articles are available. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:13, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, even with three. Re @Dimadick's opposition, is your objection due to the fact that there are 3 pages in the category OR nomination is no longer accurate? Mason (talk) 01:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
May there be standards and definitions set? There are multiple inmates fitting the qualification, and it’s important when it comes to related studies! The categories were rapidly expanded majorly based on many pages involving waivers of appeals, yes, but we can decrease the list of names by clearer terms! ContributingHelperOnTheSide (talk) 03:23, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
May we place a better definition for volunteer execution in the category? Like, an inmate should say they want to die, that they try to force the issue even by more crime while they’re in car, that their legal actions should indicatively clarify they want to be executed, not just that they gave up on fighting it. ContributingHelperOnTheSide (talk) 00:24, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even if you had a better/clearer definition, the problem is that people aren't defined by whether they're volunteering. It could be interesting as list, but not as a category. Mason (talk) 05:33, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ContributingHelperOnTheSide: with the amount of articles in this category, a separate new list article would be recommendable. There is no need for further discussion, you can just go ahead. Lists are not in the scope of this forum. (reply added after relisting) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:57, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.