Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 20

< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion | Log
< October 19
October 21 >

October 20

edit

Category:Slavery by war

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 28#Category:Slavery by war


Category:Surnames of Malagasy origin

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These two categories seem to be duplicates as they contain many of the same articles. I don't care which one is Merged into which but I think we only need one category for Malagasy surnames. They also aren't very well populated but that's another matter. Liz Read! Talk! 20:54, 20 October 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:Piedmontese-speaking people by occupation

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Redundant category layer Mason (talk) 20:04, 20 October 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:Historic buildings and structures in France

edit
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. Thorough discussion; no indication that a WP:RELIST] would help. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:45, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OVERLAPCAT & WP:SUBJECTIVECAT)
The official heritage register in France is the Monument historique and all that this category contains is the Category:Monuments historiques of France subcategory so there's no navigational benefit to this empty parent category. And, if a Wikipedia editor added any articles directly to this category, it wouldn't be encyclopedic since it's so subjective. - RevelationDirect (talk) 18:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Background: We previously deleted similar subjective "historic" building categories here, here, here and here. Also, I moved two loose articles (1, 2) to the Mh subcat prior to this nomination.- RevelationDirect (talk) 18:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The problem here is that Category:Monuments historiques of France must be subcategorized under the parent category Category:Historic buildings and structures, where the naming convention established by sibling categories for other countries requires the form "Historic buildings and structures in [Country]". The rule here isn't that things have to be categorized according to the "official name" of the register that conferred historic status; it's that the tree has to be internally consistent within itself, so that the ___location of any related category can be rationally predicted by any user regardless of their depth or lack of inside knowledge of the "official name" of anything. So we can't just file Category:Monuments historiques of France directly in the parent category, because it's out of phase with all of its siblings, but we can't just exclude it from a parent category that it needs to be in either, so this category must exist so that France has a category named the same way as its other-country siblings are named.
    There's absolutely nothing subjective about them, either, as the categories were intended for buildings that have been designated as historic by external authorities, meaning that there's no subjectivity involved since the official registers of historic buildings tell us what does or doesn't belong in the categories. They're not categories for just any random building that any random Wikipedian wants to throw in them on the basis of a personal opinion that they're historic, they're categories for buildings that have been officially designated and listed as historic by the relevant authority, and thus have clear and straightforward and entirely unsubjective inclusion criteria. Bearcat (talk) 18:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Only 8 other countries still have a sibling category we haven't deleted yet because they often are used for any random building that any random Wikipedian wants to throw in them, if they're used at all. In contrast, the less subjective Category:Heritage registers by country tree has 55 countries in it including Category:Heritage registers in France. - RevelationDirect (talk) 20:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Category:Heritage registers by country is for things that are heritage registers, not things that are buildings on heritage registers, so that and this are not duplicating each other at all. And if the categories are being used wrong, then the appropriate solution is to clean up the bad entries, not to delete the categories altogether, because the categories do serve a valid and neutral and objective purpose quite independently of any misuse that may occur. Any category can have wrong stuff added to it at any time, so if "could be used wrongly" were a reason to delete categories in and of itself then we wouldn't have any categories at all anymore. Bearcat (talk) 21:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hatting myself; too many replies
  • We actually agree that the heritage register cats are conceptually different; my point wast that in practice they contain the same building subcategories. (As for the rest, I appreciate your differing perspectives!) - RevelationDirect (talk) 21:39, 20 October 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:Transgender

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:45, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The subcategories under Category:Transgender by country were recently renamed to Category:Transgender topics by country following this CfD. However, the top-level parent wasn't included in that nomination. Suggest renaming accordingly for consistency and to avoid the awkward adjective category title. Paul_012 (talk) 17:17, 20 October 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:National artists of Thailand

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 28#Category:National artists of Thailand

Category:Scindia dynasty of Gwalior

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 28#Category:Scindia dynasty of Gwalior


Somali(an) people

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:48, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename and re-parent, the country Somalia did not exist yet in these centuries and it is unclear whether Somalian would include or exclude current Somaliland. So I think it is better to re-parent these categories, i.e. move them from the tree of Category:Somalian people to the tree of Category:Ethnic Somali people. For example in the 13th-century category there is someone in the Maldives who was probably an ethnic Somali. Fwiw, many articles use "Somali" rather than "Somalian" too. This is follow-up on this earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lean Oppose. It may be a follow-up discussion, but that discussion didn't conclude that we should rename everything from a nationality( Somalian) to an ethnicity (Somali). Logistically, this rename would be incompatible with the templates its currently using. Mason (talk) 21:27, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. PadFoot (talk) 13:27, 21 October 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:Logos by country

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:51, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename to align with parent Category:Wikipedia images of logos and to avoid confusion with Category:Logos which contains articles rather than images. There are a few articles in these trees (not many), they should be moved to Category:Logos. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom Mason (talk) 21:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. If separate categories for articles and image files are desired, then this looks like the best way to accomplish that. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 10:09, 21 October 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:Dynasties of the Rajputs

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 28#Category:Dynasties of the Rajputs


Category:Museum of the Year (UK) recipients

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:52, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not a defining feature of any of the subjects. Not a particularly notable award. AusLondonder (talk) 14:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question: you say its not a particularly notable award, are there notability requirements for categories? The article itself Museum of the Year has 48 references. I'm not very familiar with the rules around categories but this seems like enough. John Cummings (talk) 18:07, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Categories use a somewhat different standard, WP:DEFINING, and most of the nominations here involve WP:OC. Hope that helps! RevelationDirect (talk) 22:57, 20 October 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:Carrathool

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:52, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing only the main article and an article about a disused bridge, better categorised in parent category. AusLondonder (talk) 13:54, 20 October 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:Dumaresq, New South Wales

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 28#Category:Dumaresq, New South Wales


Category:Fiction set around Omicron Persei

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Every item in this category is a Futurama episode; it is also the only media which is frequently set there listed on the article Omicron Persei; this category may be too narrow or small. Xeroctic (talk) 13:38, 20 October 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:LGBTQ centenarians

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection under WP:EGRS Mason (talk) 12:49, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, trivial intersection. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:16, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep if Category:LGBTQ people by period subcats are defining, so is LGBTQ centenarians. EGRS doesn't say anything on that matter, yet people blindly use it imaginarily thinking it does. Or at least provide specific quote or section in which it applies.
    --MikutoH talk! 00:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    How is the intersection between being a longevist and LGBTQ defining? Your comparison doesn't make sense at all because LGBTQ people by period isn't relevant at all to the question at hand. Mason (talk) 01:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Per request @MikutoH
    >Do not create categories that intersect a particular topic (such as occupation, place of residence, or other such characteristics) with an ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or disability, unless that combination is itself recognized as a defining topic that has already been established (in reliable sources showing substantial existing research specific to the topic), as academically or culturally significant in its own right. The mere fact that such people happen to exist is not a valid criterion for determining the legitimacy of a category.
    Mason (talk) 01:42, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:EGRS. I also believe that being a centenarian is non-defining for the vast majority of people but that is a different discussion.--User:Namiba
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 from Kamyenyets

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:45, 20 October 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:People from Zardab

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:42, 20 October 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:People from Sulam

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:38, 20 October 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:People from Athens, West Virginia

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:26, 20 October 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:People from Anawalt, West Virginia

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:21, 20 October 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:People from Lemington, Vermont

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:13, 20 October 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:People from Gazipaşa

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 08:40, 20 October 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:People from Thompson, North Dakota

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 04:47, 20 October 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:People from Kensington, New Hampshire

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category containing a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 01:47, 20 October 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:Lostwave

edit
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. A rename nomination where that is the sole object of discussion might find consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:16, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Lostwave" is basically an ill-defined currently trendy Internet term that refers to music of unknown origins, which can also refer to completely lost works such as Ready 'n' Steady, or songs that are only known based on fragments, which seems to be the most common as listed on the page. While it is definitely "real" insofar its a term people use and there is something of a community around it, the fact it isn't clearly defined to begin with, and almost completely overlaps with "Lost musical works", "Rediscovered musical works" or "Works of unknown authorship" doesn't really make it suitable as a category. Iostn (talk) 22:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Distinct phenomenon from lost musical works, which are pieces and recordings of music which secondary sources can attest existed at one point, but no longer do. Support renaming to Music of unknown origin, which unlike the trendy "Lostwave" is a time-tested phrase in academia. DigitalIceAge (talk) 19:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the rename proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's an improvement over the present name. Mason (talk) 22:26, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus to keep or merge the category, but I am not seeing objection to renaming if kept.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:47, 20 October 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:FL-Class cricket articles of Mid-importance

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 28#Category:FL-Class cricket articles of Mid-importance

Women local politicans

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Change to Fooian/Xian per parents. --MikutoH talk! 04:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the comments by Mason and Marcocapelle?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:59, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:29, 20 October 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:Critics of veganism

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:OPINIONCAT. Web-julio (talk) 05:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Tryptofish's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:25, 20 October 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:British music logos

edit
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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:36, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Limited scope (contains just one entry and one subcat) with likely limited expansion. Exists without an established Category:Music logos tree that also seems too limited to exist. Upmerge to Category:British logos. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If articles and image files need to be separated then sure, go ahead. I don't know that they actually do, but if Marcocapelle insists then I'm willing to trust them. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 15:57, 20 October 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_October_20&oldid=1254246910"