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: there may be room for categories for some specific trilateral relations that are especially notable. However, splitting them by type of relation (cultural/trade/hostile/sports etc.) and creating a hoard of empty intermediate categories for very little content does not help navigation. The only content in all this is Doctor Who in the United States and Canada. Place Clichy (talk) 16:13, 23 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.
Trilateral relations of Canada, Mexico, and the United States
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: there may be room for categories for some specific trilateral relations that are especially notable. However, splitting them by type of relation (cultural/trade/hostile/sports etc.) and creating a hoard of empty intermediate categories for very little content does not help navigation. Place Clichy (talk) 16:13, 23 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.
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: there may be room for categories for some specific trilateral relations that are especially notable. However, splitting them by type of relation (cultural/trade/hostile/sports etc.) and creating a hoard of empty intermediate categories for very little content does not help navigation. The only content here is China–Japan–Korea Friendship Athletic Meeting. Place Clichy (talk) 16:13, 23 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.
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: there may be room for categories for some specific trilateral relations that are especially notable. However, splitting them by type of relation (cultural/trade/hostile/sports etc.) and creating a hoard of empty intermediate categories for very little content does not help navigation. The only content here is British India. Place Clichy (talk) 16:13, 23 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.
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.
OpposeSee Martyred Intellectuals Day for context, and there have been multiple government lists at various times [[1]]. This is an official title used by the government, media, researchers, etc in Bangladesh. RS can be used for verification on a case by case basis. I unfortunately do not have to any official gazettes. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 23:28, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"The ministry in the past four years published four gazettes listing the names of 560 intellectuals, based on recommendations from a national committee. The national committee had a sub-committee to scrutinise the list." and unofficial ""Shaheed Buddhijibi Koshgrantha" listed 328 martyred intellectuals, but said the list was not complete. The documentary "Bangladesh" said 1,109 intellectuals were martyred. Banglapedia estimated that 1,111 intellectuals were killed – including 991 academics, 49 physicians, 42 lawyers, 13 journalists, nine litterateurs and artists, five engineers, and two others."Vinegarymass911 (talk) 11:54, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for Now Currently there is a problem with subjectivity. If an agreed-upon formal list is published, a category would be warranted if it was defining. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:44, 27 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.
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: This category is currently classified as an ethnic group, and its description states that the term "refers to the Afroasiatic language family, and by extension, to the peoples and cultures associated with these languages." I find these to be misleading, as there is no single ethnic group that would define itself by this language family. Also, using an adjective for a category title is nearly always ambiguous, imprecise and syntaxically incorrect, and most such categories have been renamed. I suggest reparenting to the wider Afro-Asia region instead. Place Clichy (talk) 11:13, 23 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.
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.
