Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 17

< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion | Log
< June 16
June 18 >

June 17

edit

Category:State elections

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 to rename or explicitly authorize the creation of a new category. Of course, CFD consensus is not a requirement before creating a category, so anyone is welcome to do so at any time. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 15:18, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, aligning with parent Category:Politics of country subdivisions, a more general name because not in every country a subdivision is called "state". Marcocapelle (talk) 14:21, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - an interesting proposal. To me the word subdivision does not only mean state, it can mean anything on a local level. I think state elections refer to Category:State politics. Moondragon21 (talk) 16:42, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I think subdivisions include a lot more than just "States", so the separation is valid. -Samoht27 (talk) 16:59, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am in favor of creating a separate category -Samoht27 (talk) 17:03, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So am I. Moondragon21 (talk) 05:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the proposal to create a new category instead of renaming?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:11, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A new category is a good idea. Perhaps Category:Elections in country subdivisions could include Category:Local and municipal elections and Category:State elections. Moondragon21 (talk) 11:26, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Hoping for further comment on rename vs. creating a new category. If no further comment, consensus to rename is likely.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 23:12, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Aren't big church, union or sports associations councils also elections by country subdivisions? The only legitimate contents of such a category are indeed state subdivisions (e.g. Counties, Cities, sub States like California). -- Just N. (talk) 09:53, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Justus Nussbaum: no, church, union or sports associations councils aren't also country subdivisions. Proper country subdivisions are states (e.g. US, Germany), provinces (e.g. China, Netherlands), prefectures (Japan), etc. Why would we need to take states apart from provinces and prefectures? Marcocapelle (talk) 09:11, 21 June 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:Czech Renaissance humanists

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 to rename * Pppery * it has begun... 02:22, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename, consistent with Category:16th-century Czech people and Category:17th-century Czech people redirecting to Category:16th-century people from Bohemia and Category:17th-century people from Bohemia. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:17, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure about that: most people of today won't even know the notion Bohemia (except specialist historians) but will know Czechia. Facts: Bohemia is indeed "the westernmost and largest historical region of the Czech Republic. Bohemia can also refer to a wider area consisting of the historical Lands of the Bohemian Crown ruled by the Bohemian kings, including Moravia and Czech Silesia," Do we edit Wikipedia categories for ordinary peoples' use and understanding or for historian specialists? Not so easy to decide. -- Just N. (talk) 12:43, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:14, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 23:10, 17 June 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:Digital Literacy

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 to Category:Digital literacy. There is no consensus to delete or merge this category; given that the category will still exist in some form, and nobody expressed opposition to the rename proposal, I see rough consensus to rename. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:40, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERCAT. Delete or merge. Gjs238 (talk) 14:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 23:02, 17 June 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:Non-fiction books by Jilly Cooper

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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:36, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-fiction books just go in the "books by" category, no need to have a subcat --woodensuperman 15:07, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 23:02, 17 June 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:Restoration of the independence of the Baltic states

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 * Pppery * it has begun... 02:25, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization. We already have Category:Singing Revolution for the events leading to the independence of the Baltic States. Mellk (talk) 16:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on TamsaVakaras's latest comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:26, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Seeking further comment to establish consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 22:57, 17 June 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:Communications authorities

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. This has gone on for ~seven weeks, and there is zero agreement between participants other than we could potentially create a new category titled Category:Telecommunications authorities. If one wishes to do so, they can; consensus is not required before creating a category. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:43, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Clearer name.

Some things thrown in here are like government 'propaganda' media company regulators but if it's like telecom regulators or cable company regulators that should be 'Electronic communications authorities'. CaribDigita (talk) 02:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Shouldn't it become Category:Telecommunication authorities, similar to Category:Telecommunication? Marcocapelle (talk) 02:27, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I am actually seeking comment for proposing that get renamed also to "Cat:Electronic Communications" as well to get rid of this arbitrary weirdness of some- countries being "Cat:Communications in (country name)" while others are "Cat:Telecommunications in (country name). 1) Example: :Category:Telecommunications in the United Kingdom but then if you look inside the Pacific bloc. Everything inside Category:Communications in Oceania by territory or dependency is filed under ":Category:Communications in (country name)". This could all be flattened to a single tree of "Electronic Communications in (blank)" some countries have no "telecommunications" networks - Some have ripped all there legacy telecommunications networks out and now only have electronic "Communications" networks left. "Telecommunications" is archaic. Today, the true legacy phone ("telecommunications") companies like AT&T are ripping out their own PTSN networks and replacing it with the same fiberoptics and copper like cable companies. Or Fiber directly to premises. And further the legacy cable companies, now sell digital broadband phone services too. Meaning traditional phone companies now sell TV, and traditional tv providers now sell phone. They're all electronic communications companies now regardless of their history. And the lines are bluring. Companies like Meta/Facebook are now launching fiberopitics cables across the seabed but they aren't "Telecoms" in the true sense of the word. CaribDigita (talk) 13:29, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It would/should be a redirect right now because there's no reason to have both "Telecommuncations" & "electronic communications". But there's two categories still. That's the point I am making about the current category space there should just be one common one. Also "Amateur Ham Radio" can be under the Electronic Communications umbrella/ whereas it doesn't technically fall under "Telecommunications". Same for all satellites. Also Aircraft /airport homing beacons.. Some satellites are for example are ONLY weather satellites or other earth monitoring and don't do "telecommunications" (i.e. GPS only transmits- it's not designed to be a lot of two-way telecommunications) but all that could could fit under a neater sub-"Cat:Electronic communications".

  • Further comment:
  • Part of what I am envisioning in the grand scheme is flatten all of this into Electronic Communications.
    Then underneath you can have electronic communications by type:
    • Cat:Radio broadcasting(radiostations)
    • Cat:Television broadcasting(television stations)
    • Cat:Wireless/mobile providers
    • Cat:WANs / LANs (notable ones)
    • Cat:SONETS
    Also "Cat:Electronic communications standards by name": 802.11x, GSM, CDMA, Bluetooth, etc.
    "Cat: Electronic communications equipment manufacturers by type":
    • Telecom: Polycom, Nokia, Ericsson, etc.
    • Network and Switching equipment > Wireless Routers, Mobile phone towers, SONET, Wi-FI, etc.
    • Electronic communications regulators. i.e. FCC, OFCOM, etc.
    • Electronic communications standards consortia: Bell Labs, Cable Labs, EU's GSMArena, etc.
    A complete and total refresh and neatening up of everything electronic communications in essence. I am hoping it might revive new spirit to clean up and edit under this topic. CaribDigita (talk) 13:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The situation in category space isn't much different from article space, we have:
Everything that does not fit Telecommunications can stay in Communication. If you want to create Category:Telecommunications authorities under Category:Communications authorities just go ahead. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:51, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 22:55, 17 June 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:Primitive painters

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 (non-admin closure). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:37, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: these seem to be overlapping. SMasonGarrison 13:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as Naïve art and Primitivism explain, they are not the same. Naïve is art produced by untrained artists. Primitivism is trained artists imitating the style of naïve art or idealizing and aestheticizing Primitive art. --Jahaza (talk) 15:38, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Jahaza's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:09, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 22:55, 17 June 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.


Works set in cities

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 (non-admin closure). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:37, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename and re-parent to the Works tree. Normally "in fiction" categories contain "works set in", "fictional people" and "fictional locations". But in the above cases there are only works. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:33, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
One obvious problem with the proposed names: some of the items in these categories are not "set in" the places, but merely filmed there, with the locations standing in for somewhere else (real or fictional). Petra stands out as a perfect example of a place that is frequently used as a backdrop not as Petra, but as an imaginary ___location that may or may not be more clearly named or described. The problem, then, is what to name the category. "Depictions of" or "Portrayals of" might be problematic where a ___location isn't meant to represent itself; i.e. Toronto used to represent Metropolis, a London neighborhood used to depict nineteenth-century Dublin, etc. (although between the two, "depictions of" sounds less problematic because the actual place is "depicted" in a sense, even if it's standing in for somewhere else; I think that "portrayed" might also be capable of that meaning, but it seems less intuitive).
Perhaps "Fooburg in film and television" as a subcategory of "Fooburg in media" or "Fooburg in fiction"? But those categories wouldn't be limited to "fictional" appearances. Not sure that matters as a subcategory as long as some of the entries are fictional (whether or not they're intended to represent Fooburg—the defining criterion would be that it's in fiction). I note that written works shouldn't have this issue: they don't need to use one ___location to stand in for another; even in media such as graphic novels or comic books, the artist can draw the correct ___location or a completely original one (though photonovels of visual media using a stand-in ___location would be an exception). P Aculeius (talk) 14:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • This problem can be resolved easily by purging article Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen from Category:Petra in fiction. The article is in a ridiculous number of "shot in" categories anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:30, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That presumes that only one place is or is likely to be categorized based on its appearance as a different or generic ___location, and that it will only occur once... I'm reasonably certain that Petra has been used many times in various works of significance without any intention of it representing Petra. And so have many other places that might be identifiable to persons familiar with the backdrops, though not to general audiences.
    Purging a category of items in order to justify renaming it seems counterintuitive; it's not renaming, but changing the scope of the category. In this case categories intended to include depictions of places in fictional works would be expanded to include non-fiction, but at the same time restricted to exclude works that depict the place as a stand-in for somewhere else. So a painting of Tangier would be included, but a movie shot in Tangier but set in Baghdad or Marrakesh would not.
    The proposal seems to proceed from the fact that "Fooburg in fiction" doesn't include "fictional people" or "fictional locations", but just "works". Obviously we wouldn't expect real places to include "people" or "fictional locations" as subcategories—there might be exceptions—but the lack of certain subcategories doesn't seem to justify changing their scope so that they can't include things they normally would, but ought to include many things that they currently should not. P Aculeius (talk) 15:39, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Seeking further comment to establish consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 22:54, 17 June 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.

Seasonal holidays

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: keep. If someone wants to pursue this in the future, jc37's proposal might find consensus. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 14:49, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant as we already have Category:January observances until Category:December observances. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:50, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Many holidays or festivals are tied to the time of the year, not a particular calendar month. Think of lunar holidays, they aren't tied to any specific month in a calendar year and that is only one example. Liz Read! Talk! 07:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:07, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Pppery: if that were the case a split between Northern and Southern Hemisphere would not be needed. But in fact I do not see any articles that fit summer holidays in both hemispheres. The holidays are simply defined by a date (on any calendar). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:57, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 22:50, 17 June 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.

20th-century establishments in Aragon

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/delete * Pppery * it has begun... 02:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Isolated categories. The 21st century shows a little more potential to be usefully populated. – Fayenatic London 20:37, 17 June 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:Puerto Rican recipients of the Medal of Honor

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 * Pppery * it has begun... 02:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category:Recipients of United States military awards and decorations and Category:Recipients of the Medal of Honor not subcategorized by state, territory or insular area. Gjs238 (talk) 16:13, 17 June 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:Deccani language

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 Treating this as a WP:G5 speedy deletion, so no prejudice against anyone who isn't a sock recreating * Pppery * it has begun... 02:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is a dialect, not a language. There's no need to isolate this dialect. These categories were rapid-fire made by a sockpoppet. SMasonGarrison 02:17, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:19, 17 June 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:Africa-focused media

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 to Category:Mass media about Africa * Pppery * it has begun... 02:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge into existing more clear category "Category:News media in Africa" CaribDigita (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:19, 17 June 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:Football clubs in Porto-Novo

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 the ones not singled out. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There are 1–2 articles or one article and its epocat in each of these very detailed intersections. It does not help navigation. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 10:37, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for populating Porto-Novo, Rabat, and Windhoek. I have no objection to keeping them. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 10:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I've added {{clc}} to the nominated categories to help with assessing them.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:18, 17 June 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:Skyscraper hotels by country and city

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: implement the revised proposal. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 14:48, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No need for all these layers as Category:Skyscraper hotels in China et cetera are almost completely empty on categories. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 13:48, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 15:00, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose This still results in awkward navigation for users trying to easily locate information from various directions/starting points--the very purpose for having such categories. These deletes would serve no beneficial or necessary WP purpose. Hmains (talk) 00:24, 2 July 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:20th-century Slovak engravers

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 21#Category:20th-century Slovak engravers

Category:Mongolian actors by populated place

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 * Pppery * it has begun... 02:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec
Support per nom. SMasonGarrison 13:42, 17 June 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:Towns in Egypt

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 * Pppery * it has begun... 02:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category appears to be obsolete, all the pages in this category are also in categories for their governorates (e.g. Populated places in Minya Governorate) (with the exception of Ahamidat Al Horah which I have PRODed as I have not been able to establish that it is a place). This category would have made sense in the past to categorize places when the articles were stubs with no ___location information, but I think the categories for populated places in each governorate are sufficient now and we should expect any new article created to at least provide that level of information, making this category obsolete. There are also a similar category for villages which we might also want to consider, however it is quite a bit bigger and I have not gone through it yet to make sure all the pages have a suitable alternative home. Giuliotf (talk) 10:53, 17 June 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:1500s disestablishments in Sweden

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/delete * Pppery * it has begun... 02:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Around ten disestablishments per century categorised by year during these two centuries in one-per-year categories mostly. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 08:40, 17 June 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:Spanish-language television stations in Mexico

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 * Pppery * it has begun... 02:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Basically all TV stations in Mexico broadcast in Spanish. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:15, 17 June 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:History of YIVO

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 June 27#Category:History of YIVO

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_June_17&oldid=1298778961"