Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/Today

See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion policies for the official rules of this page, and how to do cleanup.

Deletion of a category may mean that the articles and images in it are directly put in its parent category, or that another subdivision of the parent category is made. If they are already members of more suitable categories, it may also mean that they become a member of one category less.

How to use this page

1. Know if the category you are looking at needs deleting (or to be created). If it is a "red link" and has no articles or subcategories, then it is already deleted (more likely, it was never really created in the first place), and does not need to be listed here.
2. Read and understand Wikipedia:Categorization before using this page. Nominate categories that violate policies here, or are misspelled, mis-capitalized, redundant/need to be merged, not NPOV, small without potential for growth, or are generally bad ideas. (See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Manual of Style.)
3. Please read the Wikipedia:Categorization of people policy if nominating or voting on a people-related category.
4. Unless the category to be deleted is non-controversial – vandalism or a duplicate, for example – please do not depopulate the category (remove the tags from articles) before the community has made a decision.
5. Add {{cfd}} to the category page for deletion. (If you are recommending that the category be renamed, you may also add a note giving the suggested new name.) This will add a message to it, and also put the page you are nominating into Category:Categories for deletion. It's important to do this to help alert people who are watching or browsing the category.
   1. Alternately, use the rename template like this: {{cfr|newname}}
   2. If you are concerned with a stub category, make sure to inform the WikiProject Stub sorting
6. Add new deletion candidates under the appropriate day near the top of this page.
   1. Alternatively, if the category is a candidate for speedy renaming (see Wikipedia:Category renaming), add it to the speedy category at the bottom.
7. Make sure you add a colon (:) in the link to the category being listed, like [[:Category:Foo]]. This makes the category link a hard link which can be seen on the page (and avoids putting this page into the category you are nominating).
8. Sign any listing or vote you make by typing ~~~~ after your text.
9. Link both categories to delete and categories to merge into. Failure to do this will delay consideration of your suggestion.

Special notes

Some categories may be listed in Category:Categories for deletion but accidently not listed here.

Discussion for Today

This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024_May_17

May 17

Category:Officers of Ipswich Corporation

• Propose merging Category:Officers of Ipswich Corporation to Category:Ipswich Corporation

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There is only one page here, which isn't helpful for navigation. I strongly encourage the category creator not to create categories with only one page in them. Mason (talk) 00:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Category:Religious buildings and structures destroyed in the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent

• Propose renaming Category:Religious buildings and structures destroyed in the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent to Category:Hindu temples destroyed during the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent

Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content. They are all Hindu temples. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:37, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

• Rename per nom. 08:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nederlandse Leeuw (talk • contribs)
• Rename perhaps as Category:Religious structures destroyed during the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent. The structures destroyed during that period include not just Hindu temples but also Jain and Buddhist ones (i.e., all idol-worshiping Indian religions). Rasnaboy (talk) 13:19, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the alt rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Category:Armenian screenwriters by century

• Propose merging Category:Armenian screenwriters by century to Category:Armenian screenwriters

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. (Even if a 2nd category were made, it still wouldn't be helpful as this is the only category in the in parent) Mason (talk) 20:08, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. By the way the subcategory covers the century that is probably the least interesting to people who study history of literature. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
• Comment. The problem here is that Category:21st-century Armenian screenwriters is using the standardized {{Screenwriters by nationality and century category header}} framework — but that template autogenerates an artificially-transcluded "[Country-named-in-this-category] screenwriters by century" as a standard part of its formatting. But that can't be left to sit there redlinked, so either it has to exist regardless of any size issues, or we have to wrap the template in {{suppress categories}} to bork its category generation and then manually file Category:21st-century Armenian screenwriters in the other categories that still exist. But that would defeat the entire purpose of using the standardized template in the first place, and would have the side-effect of stranding that category from the Category:Screenwriters by nationality and century tree.
  I'm not at all wedded to this being essential, and have personally wrapped many category-generating templates in the suppress categories wrapper when necessary, but just wanted to point out that there are "standardized formatting" considerations here beyond size.
  Really, it's more a question of whether Category:Armenian screenwriters need any by-century categorization yet — with only six people in the 21st-century category and only 20 in the parent, it's not clear that subbing them out for century is needed at all — but if the 21st-century category does exist, then this is automatically imposed and transcluded by the template as a standard and expected parent for it, so the question is really less about the need for this than it is the need for a 21st-century category to exist at all. Bearcat (talk) 15:05, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

  @Bearcat, I'm not sure how the this comment is relevant to the nomination at hand. And, for the record, it isn't the case the FOOian occupation by century needs to exist. That category is only added if it exists, otherwise, the category is added to FOOian screenwriters. Mason (talk) 19:43, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

  As a person who works regularly with cleaning up redlinked categories at Special:WantedCategories, I have to deal with new redlinked categories autogenerated by occupation header templates of this type all the phunking time. So just telling me that they suppress redlinks isn't convincing when I routinely see hard evidence that they don't. Bearcat (talk) 13:45, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

  Do you have examples of this that are recent (like since April 6th)? Because each time there's been an red link, I've added a fix to address it [1]. The present code exclusively uses resolve category redirects and checks if the category exists before it adds it. If you have evidence to the contrary, I would really like to see it so that I can figure out what is not working as intended. Mason (talk) 20:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 16:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Category:Ships built on the River Orwell

• Propose merging Category:Ships built on the River Orwell to Category:Ships built in England

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This is a redundant layer. Mason (talk) 00:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Category:Populated places on the Underground Railroad

• Propose deleting Category:Populated places on the Underground Railroad (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Specific buildings which served as stations on the Underground Railroad are absolutely defined by it but an entire town, city or county is usually not. In some cases, certain locales like New Bedford, Massachusetts were such hubs of the Underground Railroad that they should be kept in the main category but that can be done on a case by case basis. User:Namiba 15:30, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
• keep These are historically related places. They were certainly defining for these places during the historical period involved here: 1840s and 1850s in the United States. These illegal activities were something that many people in a place were at least silently aware of and did not bring to the attention of law enforcement. In many cases, the articles do not point to a specific building(s) so there is no use in thinking that will keep tying these together, as they should be. Hmains (talk) 18:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Is it defining though? In most cases, no. Neither Portland, Maine nor most other cities are not defined by the fact that they had a stop in the Underground Railroad. For cities which are defined as such, they can and should be categorized within the tree. If you can show otherwise, I will withdraw the nomination.--User:Namiba 17:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Category:Hindu temples destroyed by Muslims

• Propose merging Category:Hindu temples destroyed by Muslims to Category:Destroyed Hindu temples

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There's really not a need to diffuse this category by perpetrator Mason (talk) 04:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

• Not sure. There is also Category:Churches destroyed by Muslims and all of it is part of Category:Persecution by Muslims. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:28, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

  Hmmmmm I don't think Category:Mosques converted from churches should be a subcategory of Category:Churches destroyed by Muslims. If "destruction" is to be taken as physical devastation of a building so that it becomes a ruin or a heap of rubble, you can't just make a mosque out of that. I suggest to Template:Category see also these cats to each other instead of giving them a parent-child link. NLeeuw (talk) 23:09, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

  • Fair point. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:09, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Current thoughts on merging?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)