Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All current discussions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortcuts

Speedy renaming and merging

Remember to tag the category page with: {{subst:cfr-speedy|New name}}

New requests


Opposed requests

  • None currently


On hold pending other discussion


Moved to full discussion
  • Category:British humourous columnists to Category:British humorous columnists – C2A: Yes, this looks correct because of the British spelling of humour. However, according to the Oxford English Dictionary "humorous" is the correct spelling in all varieties of English. See Oxford English Dictionary See: https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/1187468962 🌿MtBotany (talk) 22:01, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
    Oppose, "humourous" was good enough for Jonathan Swift, and he was a better writer than any of us. DuncanHill (talk) 22:30, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
    Seriously? Jonathan Swift has been dead for 280 years. As much as I admire historical research, you really ought to point to a modern dictionary if you are going to oppose this and are not making a joke. If you are joking, well played, you got me. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 23:00, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
    @DuncanHill: "Humourous" is definitely incorrect in modern English. "Humour columnists" might be better anyway, but would need a full CfD. Mclay1 (talk) 01:19, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Current discussions

Shortcut

March 14

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:Comics single panels

Nominator's rationale: Manually populated category with 3 entries and one subcategory nominated below. Main template was Template:Non-free comic, which covers all images from comics and populates Category:Non-free comics images. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:08, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Webcomic panels

Nominator's rationale: Manually populated category with one file, which is automatically placed in a template-populated category. Populated by a template that was deleted in 2007. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:06, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Calil family

Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. this is a father son pair, that are already inter-linked. SMasonGarrison 15:21, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Translators of John Steinbeck

Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 15:11, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Australian fashion stylists

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 15:03, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Parivrajaka dynasty

Nominator's rationale: delete, only one article in each of these categories, this is not helpful for navigation. The articles are already in the parent categories so merging is not needed. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:29, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Kalachuri dynasty

Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SHAREDNAME, note that Kalachuri dynasty is a disambiguation page. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:00, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Buddhist monks from Kanchipuram district

Nominator's rationale: merge, very narrow intersection and only two articles in this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:15, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Support per nom. SMasonGarrison 15:12, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Duality theories

Nominator's rationale: Matches main article (or one of the main articles), and probably more accurate since some entries are not really "theories". 1234qwer1234qwer4 08:28, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Naval battles involving the Rashidun Caliphate

Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:52, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:History of Coats of arms

Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. The subcategories are already parented otherwise in the tree, so no need for merging. (If not deleted it should be renamed to Category:History of coats of arms.) Marcocapelle (talk) 06:39, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Naval battles involving Indian kingdoms

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:20, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:International co-production films

Nominator's rationale: Doesn't seem to be a defining characteristic. DonIago (talk) 03:49, 14 March 2026 (UTC)


Single-article non-resident ambassador categories

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining categories about non-resident ambassadors, many of whom had concurrent accreditation to a significant number of countries. All contain only a single article and are therefore completely useless for navigation. An example is Željko Janjetović, in 13 categories relating to posting as ambassador, many of them non-resident. AusLondonder (talk) 02:15, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ambassadors of Benin to China

Nominator's rationale: This category is in use at one article only, Arlette Dagnon Vignikin. However, the article says this individual served as chargé d'Affaires, which is not the same as ambassador. AusLondonder (talk) 01:38, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete since we do not have any article on people who actually served as Ambassadors of Benin to China. If we have 1 ot 2 articles that actually fit I would urge upmerging because the category would still be too narrow to aid navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:14, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge to Category:Benin–China relations or else delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:28, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep. A chargé d'affaires is a head of mission who has every power of an ambassador except the title. It would probably be overkill to have parallel categories for the top diplomat of a nation to another nation depending on their title, such as envoy (title), plenipotentiary, minister plenipotentiary etc. These are routinely placed in ambassadors categories. Looking in Category:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to China, I find many who were Chargé d'affaires (Cradock, Denson, Hopson, Hutchison, Lamb, O'Neill, Stewart, Trevelyan) or Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary (Alcock, Ingram, Jordan, MacDonald, Macleay, Parkes, Satow, Walsham). The not the same as ambassador rationale is wrong; we categorize by substance, not title. The real motivation seems to be that the nominator, from past and present nominations, seems not to see any interest in one-article, however relevant they are. If deleted, merge to Category:Benin–China relations and Category:Ambassadors to China. Place Clichy (talk) 08:35, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Palliative care medical doctors

Nominator's rationale: Simpler. "Medical" is redundant, since palliative care is an area of medicine. Similar to Category:Public health doctors. Mclay1 (talk) 00:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Lists of natural gas power stations

Nominator's rationale: Maintain consistent naming scheme with parent categories. Gjs238 (talk) 13:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 00:28, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

American and Canadian medical doctors

More information more categories ...
Close
Nominator's rationale: The article Physician was moved to Medical doctor after an RM because the term "physician" can have different meanings, and "medical doctor" is a better general term per WP:COMMONALITY, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NATURAL. Following this, the related category was moved to Category:Medical doctors at CfD, followed by most of its subcategories, including some American and Canadian categories. The remaining categories should follow suit for consistency and simplicity. Leave redirects from the current titles. Mclay1 (talk) 00:27, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename Arguably the name per common name would just be "doctor". However that term is ambiguous since it is also used for several other cases of people. Medical doctor is what was decided for the article name so we should follow in the category names as well.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:36, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
    Rename is fine by me as long as we leave redirects behind for the templates. SMasonGarrison 04:17, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Serbian historical coats of arms

Nominator's rationale: highly overlapping categories SMasonGarrison 00:14, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

March 13

University of Petroleum and Energy Studies

  • Propose renaming Category:UPES (1) to Category:University of Petroleum and Energy Studies (0)
  • Propose renaming Category:Academic staff of UPES (1) to Category:Academic staff of the University of Petroleum and Energy Studies (0)
Nominator's rationale: These categories contain an abbreviation that could be ambiguous and neither category contains a sentence that disambiguates it. Other similar categories are not abbreviated. On a side note, could someone let me know if I did this correctly? This is my first time doing this and the instructions for nominating multiple categories are confusing. Thanks. BlaqWiedow (talk) 23:22, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, only one article in both categories together, this is not helpful for navigation between similar articles. No objection to recreate the category when a few more articles can be added. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:46, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Mutharaiyar dynasty

Nominator's rationale: merge, the category only contains one article and one subcategory, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:22, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Tamilakam

Nominator's rationale: merge, largely overlapping scope. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:08, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Dravidian martial arts

Nominator's rationale: merge, contains only one article and one subcategory, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:41, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ships sunk by submarines of Pakistan

Nominator's rationale: All other subcategories in Category:Ships sunk by submarines about ships being sunk by certain nations are titled as such. Raskuly (talk) 16:19, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Sculptures by Henri Laurens

Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 13:25, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:27, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Anti-Tamil sentiment

Nominator's rationale: manually merge, only one subcategory and one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:14, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Caricaturists by ethnicity

Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer. upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 05:49, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
@Ewan2 No one is going to see your comment in Category talk:Caricaturists by ethnicity#Ethnic minorities who are born or live in different states. SMasonGarrison 13:13, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. This proposal is not removing any specific ethnic category, it just removes a redundant container level. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:31, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Albanian military personnel by war

Nominator's rationale: Redundant container categories with only one subcategory each, most of which are already in the relevant century subcategory for their nationality so don't need upmerging. Mclay1 (talk) 05:41, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose There are lots of people who served in militaries for countries they were not nationals of. Many of these people also did not serve in the military of the country they were actual nationals of. There are enough cases where these do not correspond to justify both trees.John Pack Lambert (talk) 10:55, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
    Support per nom. Underpopulated categories. SMasonGarrison 13:11, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. This proposal is not putting any article in a different country category than before, it just removes a redundant container level. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Soldiers by country

Nominator's rationale: Highly overlapping SMasonGarrison 05:11, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Soldiers of Spain

Nominator's rationale: Highly overlapping and underpopulated. Upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 05:10, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge. No need for parallel categorisation schemes. Mclay1 (talk) 05:43, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose There are a lot of people who never even set foot in Spain who served in the Spanish military. There are also people who were Spanish nationals who served in other militaries. So there is a large number of cases that fit in one but not the other.John Pack Lambert (talk) 10:52, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge. Clear duplicates. The difference is only visible to the creator of this new duplicate. It is perfectly fine to call Spanish soldiers someone who fought for Spain, and also to include the various political regimes in the history of Spain there. People who fought in several militaries, or a military other than their own, can be placed in several concurrent categories. Category:Expatriate military personnel and neighbouring categories also serve this purpose. Place Clichy (talk) 11:23, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
    I think we should leave a redirect behind to prevent the category from being recreated by accident. SMasonGarrison 13:14, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • It may not be obvious to everyone to call Spanish soldiers someone who fought for Spain, but with the two articles that are now in the category it does not really matter. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:24, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Single-article non-resident ambassador categories

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining categories about non-resident ambassadors, many of whom had concurrent accreditation to a significant number of countries. All contain only a single article and are therefore completely useless for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 04:32, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Magazines established in 1592

Nominator's rationale: dual upmerge for now. This is the only magazine established in the 16th century SMasonGarrison 04:11, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Field (mathematics)

Nominator's rationale: This was proposed for renaming into "Fields (mathematics)" at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 December 31#Category:Field (mathematics), which was declined since this is a topic category. However, the category used to be called "Field theory" before a CfDS request, and that former name seems much more natural to me. 1234qwer1234qwer4 03:58, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • My first intuition was to oppose based on article Field (mathematics) but at second instance I am supporting this because Glossary of field theory is the article that is more representative of the category content. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support. Most of the content here is about the theory of fields rather than about individual fields, so the proposed name is a more accurate description. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Afghan female dancers

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge single-article category. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 03:32, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

March 12

Category:Environmental organizations based in Cape Verde

Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 23:20, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge 1 article categories hinder navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:25, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge, these are not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:37, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Public utilities by region

Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer. Upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 23:12, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Dances of the United States

Nominator's rationale: Redundant category. ForsythiaJo (talk) 22:49, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Screenshots of Xbox Series X/S games

Nominator's rationale: For consistency with other subcategories of Screenshots of video games and Xbox Series X and Series S. thejiujiangdragon 🔥🐉 22:06, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Jatiya Sangsad

Nominator's rationale: Same category. No need to have it. Mehedi Abedin 21:17, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Southwest India

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:43, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 19:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Portuguese in Kerala

Nominator's rationale: manually merge, Kerala was not a particular subdivision of Portuguese India. The articles are already in Category:Calicut kingdom or Category:Kingdom of Cochin in the tree of Kerala, if applicable. Manually merge because a number of articles are already in e.g. Category:People from Portuguese India. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:24, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 19:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Guyana–Soviet Union relations

Nominator's rationale: Category containing only a single subcategory which itself contains only a single article about a non-resident ambassador. Not helpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 19:14, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:55, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete both per nom. LibStar (talk) 05:06, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete as lacking any contents that are appropriate to the categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:40, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ambassadors of Bolivia to the Soviet Union

Nominator's rationale: Category containing only a single article, unhelpful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 19:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge as nominated. The 1 article is in another Ambassadors of Bolivia Category so we do not need to merge to that parent.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:28, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. LibStar (talk) 04:48, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:56, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Dimes Square

Nominator's rationale: This list of people can be listified at Dimes Square. Gjs238 (talk) 18:07, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
So? Aren’t templates also important for that as well Aradicus77 (talk) 20:14, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, this is micro-categorization. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:59, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Denmark–Uruguay sports relations

Nominator's rationale: Newly-created category containing only a single article about a football tournament in France in 2023 in which both Denmark and Uruguay participated. Also contains a subcategory which was created seven years ago and was added to this category unnecessarily four days ago. AusLondonder (talk) 16:45, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:00, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete The article does not belong in this category. We do not want to put tournaments in relations categories for every team that is present. What next, will we categorize as relations between all counties represented each event at the Olympics? Down that road lies madness. If an event had competitors from just 11 countries it would be in 100 categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:44, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Barbados–Poland relations

Nominator's rationale: Despite recent discussions here, another newly-created, severely underpopulated category containing no articles and only a subcategory for expatriate sportspeople which itself only contains a single article (which is in 11 expatriate-related categories). AusLondonder (talk) 16:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, relations categories should not exist if they just contain migrants/expatriates subcategories which are only tangentially related to the topic. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:02, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete second Marcocapelle's view that these categories need articles that actual discuss the mater as a topic, not just biographies ofp people who migrated from one place to another. We should only have categories when we have articles that discuss the topic.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:54, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ambassadors of Russia to Nicaragua

Nominator's rationale: Contains only a single list article and Category:Ambassadors of the Soviet Union to Nicaragua which has recently been added to this category tree despite objection and itself only contains a single biography on an Estonian who was Soviet ambassador in the 1980s. AusLondonder (talk) 16:31, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete Ambassadors should only be classed as Ambassadors of the country they served, not as from other countries that succeeded or preceded the country they served.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:30, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per all above. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:04, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Films directed by Farhan Rana Rajpoot

Nominator's rationale: Category is only populated by a bogus entry, and the director in question has been deleted several times for not asserting notability, or being straight-out promotional. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. The only entry in this category is The Woman in Cabin 10 (film), which the person in question did not actually direct. That film's article has been spammed over the past week by a new user Bearcet and a series of temp accounts adding and readding the fake director's name. Reliable sources about this film say that there is only one director, Simon Stone. Astaire (talk) 16:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. I have also just removed this category from the above film article. DoubleCross (‡) 21:07, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Jewish fascists

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: speedy keep. withdrawn, I'll just deal with this manually. (non-admin closure) PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between ethnicity and ideology, for the same reason we deleted Category:Neo-Nazis of Jewish descent and Category:Jewish neo-Nazis. This category is a mixture of several things: religiously Jewish fascists, and ethnically Jewish fascists who are white supremacists and rejected Jewish identity and religion, e.g. Harold von Braunhut, Dan Burros, William Potter Gale. These two things are not the same at all, the second is not defining, and the category opens it up to both in combination. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:34, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep. Yes defining. We have the whole Category:Fascists by nationality. Jews are special case due to their "exterritoriality" and mixed ethnoreligious definition, therefore Jews do not pegeonhole neatly into standard categories. Hence this category is, as you say, "the mixture", but all items are Jews, and it is a common denominator. I checked a couple of bios, and they are explicitely defined as fascists. It would be really weird to place, e.g., Abba Ahimeir into category "Russian fascists". --Altenmann >talk 15:46, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    Jewish is not a nationality, also WP:OCEGRS. Several of these people are Jews only if we go by the "one drop rule" of anyone with any amount of Jewish ancestry being Jewish, even if they have no tie to the community at all, which is grossly inappropriate, and not all of them are defined as fascist. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:54, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    • If you do not like comparison with "Nationality" category, we have Category:People by ethnicity and political orientation. --Altenmann >talk 16:08, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
      Quite possibly all those categories are problematic too, as evidenced that out of the thousands of ethnicities in the world we only categorize by 5 random assortments - Jews, Chechens, Aromanians, Arabs, and Kurds. Not the sign of a consistent category system! PARAKANYAA (talk) 16:35, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    • OCERGS spells an exception "unless that combination is recognized as a defining topic". "Jewih fascists" is a recognized topic. If you think some entries are inappropriate, you may remove them. --Altenmann >talk 16:04, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
      The sources there are about many different things, not one recognized topic. Jewish religious extremists, secular but nationalist Jews/extreme Zionists, and total rejectors of Jewish identity who we cannot actually define as "Jewish" per our category system. These are not at all the same thing.
      Removing the entries doesn't fix the category because it's a combination of many different things. Putting everyone in here with a Jewish grandparent who happens to be a white supremacist (of which we have several articles) is a violation and they will keep getting put in here. PARAKANYAA (talk) 16:31, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
      You know what, I'll just remove the non-Jewish ones with Jewish descent, and withdraw this. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
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:Surnames of Croatian origin

Nominator's rationale: Inclusion into the categories "Surnames of ... origin" is for surnames in cultures other than the origin. The content of this category is 100% match for the Category:Surnames by language for articles of this type.. --Altenmann >talk 15:15, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Correction: not simply renamed, but Category:Croatian-language surnames must be defined in the standard way, see, eg., Category:Latvian-language surnames. And then content moved. --Altenmann >talk 15:19, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
We had several discussions about these a while back,
These categories are in fact by culture, because the standard language varieties are younger than the vast majority of the surnames. (Keep) --Joy (talk) 18:12, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
<he-he> I looked there and see "Propose renaming Category:Croatian-language surnames to Category:Surnames of Croatian origin" ; the result of the discussion was: "keep". So how come they ended up renamed into what we have now? <...> Ah, I see: freaking super-lightning-fast speedy! So I would say revert speedy rename of critical categories--Altenmann >talk 21:42, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
As you can see in the 2021 RfD, we used just "Croatian surnames" etc until that point in 2023. I searched in the history of CFDS and found the proposal which claimed C2C. It went unopposed and accepted a few days later. I don't know if CFDS should have some sort of an automated check for previous RfDs, but anyway, it wasn't really a critical difference compared to the language stuff from before. --Joy (talk) 22:14, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

See the discussion in the section below. --Altenmann >talk 21:33, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Surnames of Serbian origin

Nominator's rationale:Inclusion into the categories "Surnames of ... origin" is for surnames in cultures other than the origin. The content of this category is 100% match for the Category:Surnames by language for articles of this type. --Altenmann >talk 15:12, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Correction: not simply renamed, but Category:Serbian-language surnames must be defined in the standard way, see, eg., Category:Latvian-language surnames. And then content moved. --Altenmann >talk 15:19, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Is there any reason for this section not to be merged with the above one? --Joy (talk) 18:14, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
The only reason is that I am not aware of sources that say Serbian-language surnames and Croatina-language surnames are the same, as well as other post-Yugoslav languages. Not to say, I would hate to start Balkan wars here. Adding insult to injury, 95% of them are unreferenced. Articles Serbian surname and Croatian surname do not make me wiser and in fact make me to rethink my proposals: there may surnames of definitely Serbian or Croatian origin: the toponymic ones, judging from ppalenames that were historicallyand firmly Croatian. But again, to make this judgement we need <sigh> RS.
So maybe you are right: put the all into Category:Serbo-Croatian-language surnames: Serbo-Croatian, also known as Bosnian-Croatian-Montenegrin-Serbian (BCMS), is a South Slavic language. --Altenmann >talk 21:32, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
There's ample documentation of these surnames appearing in these cultures, sometimes overlapping, sometimes not; the fact most surname pages are no more than navigation aids doesn't detract from that. This argument seems to boil down to "Wikipedia sucks, therefore let's burn it all down!". You didn't seem do much due diligence and appear to be shooting from the hip.
Because of the well-known controversy in the naming of Serbo-Croatian and the well-known propensity of editors to use Wikipedia as a battleground in this topic area, this change should absolutely not be done. This would waste so, so many of our volunteer man-hours if we were to do that. On top of that, we'd lose the existing level of granularity that we already accumulated over the years. So it's like waste on top of more waste. The thought of this fills me with dread. --Joy (talk) 22:26, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
WOW! Calm down. I simply misread your suggestion "Is there any reason for this section not to be merged with the above one?" - I mistook it for the suggestion to mere categories. As for "why not merge" - I had the same idea, but unlike AfD, in category pages the rename templates are not substed, so I canot easily make both of them point to the same discussion. You may try. --Altenmann >talk 00:36, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
P.S., when the dust settles, I wil place warnings on both categories to suggest speedy renaming of them. Or, if you woud like, we may request move protection, to avoid futher confusion. --Altenmann >talk 00:36, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Regarding There's ample documentation of these surnames appearing in these cultures, well, as you put it, "Wikipedia sucks" If I were as vicious as you think, I would go around, slap {unreferenced} everywhere and after some time delete all text but lists. Speaking about "ample documentation", I have solid sources for Polish, Lithuanian, German, Yiddish, and Russian surnames (per my cultural origins:-). And whenever I run into one, I am adding a ref, like, e.g, here. If you point me at reliable refs to the "ample documentation" you mentioned, I will gladly use it for South Slavic surnames as well. --Altenmann >talk 00:36, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Belarusian expatriate sportspeople in Yugoslavia

Nominator's rationale: An anachronistic category for a single article, about a footballer who was a Soviet citizen when he settled in Podgorica. Place Clichy (talk) 14:58, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Support With an excepion of a very short period , when it was Yugoslavia, the nationality of Belarusian sportsmen was Soviet Union. By the way, which Yugoslavia? Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia or Federal Republic of Yugoslavia? Anyway, I dont think anybody sought Yugoslav citizenship during this turbulent period. --Altenmann >talk 00:44, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge The actual contents are Soviet nationals who were in Yugoslavia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:31, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose this way, the Soviet Union no longer existed when he was in Yugoslavia in 1992. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:21, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-defining. The 1 biography here is on someone who spent part of the year playing for a team based in Yugoslavia. And the other part of 1992 playing for a team in Hungary. It is quite possible he may have spent the off season elsewhere. I do not think we should put people in multiple expatriate categories for multiple countries that combined might add to a year.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:58, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Belarusian podcasters

Nominator's rationale: Recently created 1-article category. Gjs238 (talk) 12:12, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • del. In fact, I am emptied it: she is not "Belarusian" poscaster at least no refs describe her as such, even in ruwiki. --Altenmann >talk 00:49, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete we really need a way to stop there 1 article categories. They actively hindering navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:32, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Sinking of the SS Marquette

Nominator's rationale: Delete and manually merge to appropriate categories in Category:Shipwrecked people. Contains almost entirely articles of people on the ship the day it was sunk. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Genocide of Muslims and Croats in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia

Nominator's rationale: While the Chetniks who perpetrated this genocide were notionally fighting for the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, this kingdom no longer existed de facto when it took place. The current name is equivalent (for example) to describing UPA atrocities as taking place in the "Ukrainian Independent United State" (as this was the hypothetical entity the UPA fought for). GCarty (talk) 09:50, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Question, is it appropriate to call it a genocide? (Alternatively we might rename to Category:Chetnik massacres of Muslims and Croats.) Marcocapelle (talk) 05:29, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename to use massacres. I think we should avoid over stating the scope of events.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:08, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Kansas Jayhawks wrestling coaches

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge single-article category. Not helpful for navigation. This category was intended to be included in a previous nomination that upmerged all other single-article categories in the tree, but it was accidentally left out. The parent Category:Kansas Jayhawks wrestling contains nothing else so can be deleted. Mclay1 (talk) 06:45, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge and Delete as nominated. These 1 article categories are counter the purpose of categories in that they make navigation between articles harder.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Egyptian mathematics

Nominator's rationale: Presumably Ancient Egyptian mathematics is the main article for the category. (Note that Category:Egyptian mathematicians should be moved out of this category, with Category:Ancient Egyptian mathematicians replacing it.) Otherwise, the category should be called Category:Mathematics in Egypt to match others in Category:Mathematics by country. 1234qwer1234qwer4 04:15, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Permanent representatives of Andorra to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons

Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Already in other ambassador cats. LibStar (talk) 04:07, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Cigar factories

Nominator's rationale: I fail to see much distiction. --Altenmann >talk 03:08, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Considering the content of the articles the category can be salvaged as former cigar factories. When we do that, factories is more appropriate because it refers to the buildings, not the organizations. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:42, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename to Category:Former cigar factories for clarity per above. Mclay1 (talk) 06:49, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    • In this case, IMO the two categoried must be cross-referenced somehow, e.g., in their descriptions. --Altenmann >talk 15:27, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Salvadoran people of English descent

Nominator's rationale: Recently created 1-article category, not helpful to navigation. Gjs238 (talk) 00:47, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge for now, this is not helpful for navigation. No objection to recreation when there are a few more articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:45, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename to Category:Salvadoran people of British descent. British is a nationality, European is not. European descent categories should be containers and not contain individual articles as otherwise this would serve as a proxy for race, per WP:ETHNICRACECAT and consensus in many previous discussions: (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). Place Clichy (talk) 15:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete since we avoid directly placing people in by continent of descent categories since they too often start to serve as proxies for race.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:38, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Ok, if Category:Salvadoran people of European descent is meant to be a container category then I agree with deletion too. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:37, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Motorsport venues in Goa

Nominator's rationale: Recently created 1-article category, not helpful to navigation. Gjs238 (talk) 00:43, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Annual events in Cape Town

Nominator's rationale: Recently created 2-article category. Overcategorization, not helpful to navigation. Gjs238 (talk) 00:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

March 11

Category:Rock flautists by nationality

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container category with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 23:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:17th-century Danish shipbuilders

Nominator's rationale: multi upmerge for now. underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 23:19, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Dual merge per nom, although I am not entirely sure if "artisans" is appropriate. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:50, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • The rationale is expressed in such impenetraple wikinese that its impossible to understand the benefit. Please express your self in clear English.Creuzbourg (talk) 12:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge since 1 article categories hinder navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:20, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Canadian provincial police

Nominator's rationale: Not all provinces refer to them as provincial police, and this category and the destination cover much of the same information. but the destination category can over law enforcement agencies at provincial jurisdiction levels that are maybe not provincial police or provinces that have multiple law enforcement agencies that have province wide jurisdiction but are not 'provincial police'. HighlandFacts (talk) 22:29, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Mclay1 (talk) 23:40, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Italian expatriates in Papua New Guinea

Nominator's rationale: Category containing only a single article on a religious missionary killed in the 1850s in what is now Papua New Guinea. Already partly covered by Category:Roman Catholic missionaries in Papua New Guinea. AusLondonder (talk) 17:57, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:28, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete This person predated both Papua New Guinea and Italy. Italy was not a country one could be an expatriate from until 1862.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:22, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Good point, I agree with deletion. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:40, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:European championships international draughts

Nominator's rationale: Consistent with other category names in Category:European championships. I think this category should cover all variants of draughts, not just international draughts. But if it only covers international draughts it could also be renamed to Category:European International Draughts Championships. Hillyrrr (talk) 16:39, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Syfy (French TV channel)

Nominator's rationale: This category only contains 2 articles, one of which (the list) is, at present, completely devoid of sources. I don't think a TV channel that I believe hardly anyone outside of France watches is worth having a category on the English-language Wikipedia. JHD0919 (talk) 14:38, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Bidar Sultanate

Nominator's rationale: merge, one article and one subcategory only, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Former zamindari estates in Uttar Pradesh

Nominator's rationale: rename, "former" is redundant because all Zamindari estates were abolished in the 1950s. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename per nom. Mclay1 (talk) 23:44, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Neologisms by year

Nominator's rationale: Small WP:OCYEAR categories; no other categories until 1960. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:49, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom, except it is not very meaningful to create Category:1713 introductions for one article. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:55, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Television episodes set in the United Kingdom by county

Nominator's rationale: Merge for now with no objection to recreating if there are more similar categories; only one subcategory in this. Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:42, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Kings of Mithila

Nominator's rationale: rename as there was also a queen regnant Lakhimadevi. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:31, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename per nom. I'm pretty sure there's an example very similar to this in a guideline, but I can't find it. Mclay1 (talk) 23:50, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ambassadors of Austria to Poland

  • Nominator's rationale the 1 article in here (which is unsourced) seems to have been an ambassador of the Habsburg monarchy to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. We do not need a category for this 1 article that meets those criteria. The subject is already in Category:Diplomats of the Habsburg monarchy. That leaves just the other parent for the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:15, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:59, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment I have proposed that article for deletion given the complete lack of sources and evidence of notability. AusLondonder (talk) 18:02, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    • Sources were added. They are in Polish I think which I cannot read so I cannot say more on that other than 1 article is not enough to justify a category and it is misnamed since the subject was am ambassador of the Archduchy of Austria/Habsburg Monarchy to the Polish-Lithuania Commonwealth.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:37, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ambassadors of Austria to Norway

  • Nominator's rationale As far as I can tell the 1 article here does not belong at all. It appears he was an ambassador to France, to the Kingdom of Prussia, to the Kingdom of Saxony and appointed to the Russian Empire but did not operate there. I read through the article and see no mention to the subject having served as Ambassadors to Norway.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:58, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:02, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete Only use of the category is unsupported by the article. Redundant category. AusLondonder (talk) 09:11, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment This category illustrates why 1 article categories are a bad idea. We have an unsupported categorization. Normally this would have been removed 2 or more days ago. However because it is a 1 article category we are having to wait at least a week for this discussion to close.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:39, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Rock harpists by nationality

Nominator's rationale: redundant category layer. upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 05:02, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:03, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 23:51, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Night markets in Canada

Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 03:54, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:04, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Belarusian documentary filmmakers

Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 03:42, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ethiopian Royal Family

Nominator's rationale: This might be speediable, but I'm worried I'm missing some nuance of capitalization. The parent is "African royal families" and siblings are Nigerian royal families, Yoruba royal families SMasonGarrison 02:42, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename to Category:Ethiopian royalty but remove anyone who was not a royal. The articles here are biographies not articles on families. This would be a sister category to Category:French royalty, Category:Swedish royalty, etc. The header incorrectly calls it a lust and then says "this list does not include the emperors if Ethiopia" even though in fact that is a sub-catJohn Pack Lambert (talk) 05:37, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    Sounds good to me SMasonGarrison 00:23, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support alt rename to Category:Ethiopian royalty. There are no subcategories or articles about multiple royal families so a rename to Category:Ethiopian royal families is less meaningful. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:10, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Single-member, non-resident Austrian ambassador categories

Nominator's rationale: All of these categories contain only a single article and are unhelpful for navigation. They are not defining and result in over-categorisation of individual articles. Romana Königsbrun is in nine non-resident categories. AusLondonder (talk) 01:31, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete non-residence ambassadorships we do not need to categorize by. The 10th ambassadorial placement Category Königsbrun is in has her as the only biography in it as well.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:44, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, we shouldn't categorize non-resident ambassadorship. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:13, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete as above, we shouldn't create cats for non resident ambassadors. LibStar (talk) 05:51, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ammunition dumps in Pembrokeshire

Nominator's rationale: The parent category Category:Ammunition dumps in Wales currently contains only two redirects and this is the only subcategory and it contains two articles. Given how underpopulated both are this is an unnecessary layer. AusLondonder (talk) 00:46, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

March 10

Category:Swedish rock pianists

Nominator's rationale: underpopulated category. upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 23:49, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Danish Jews by denomination

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container category with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 23:17, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Southeast India

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:01, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:LGBTQ rights activists from Iowa

Nominator's rationale: dual upmerge for now. underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 21:48, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Dual merge, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:03, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Czech Republic–Montenegro sports relations

Nominator's rationale: Category about Czech-Montenegro "sports relations" consisting of Yugoslavia at the 1978 European Athletics Championships which took place in Prague and UEFA Euro 2012 qualifying play-offs, despite the fact that article was already appropriately categorised, with categories such as Category:Czech Republic at UEFA Euro 2012. The creator of this new category however removed the article from Category:2011–12 in Czech football when they placed this new category. AusLondonder (talk) 20:06, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, mere participation to a sports tournament should not be added to a bilateral relations category. On top of that Yugoslavia is not Montenegro. The remaining single subCategory:Montenegrin expatriate sportspeople in the Czech Republic does not require this as a parent. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:07, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Respectfully, that is not participation to a sports tournament. Montenegro did not participate in UEFA Euro 2012. This is a qualifying play-off, i.e. a single (actually a home-and-home two-leg) match. Place Clichy (talk) 05:43, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    • Qualification matches are an integral part of a tournament and it certainly does not matter when it comes to bilateral relations. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:59, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep, several reasons and comments:
    • The UEFA Euro 2012 qualifying play-offs was not part of the wider UEFA Euro 2012 tournament, it was a single game opposing Czech Republic and Montenegro for qualifying to it, one of four such games. Direct face-to-face games between countries, when notable enough for a Wikipedia article, are routinely added to bilateral relations category where they of course belong. The purpose of Category:Bilateral sports relations by country and children is precisely to move such articles away from the root of such categories next to war, diplomacy and treaties for clarity and the benefit of readers.
    • Category:Montenegrin expatriate sportspeople in the Czech Republic (16 articles) is also a legitimate child of this category, conveniently forgotten by the nominator in their somewhat misleading rationale. The fact that professional sportspeople from Montenegro come to play for Czech teams (more than the opposite it seems) is also a reflection of sports-related links between these countries.
    • Category:2011–12 in Czech football is already a parent of Category:Czech Republic at UEFA Euro 2012, and therefore a redundant grand-parent of article UEFA Euro 2012 qualifying play-offs per WP:SUBCAT. When browsing other articles about Euro qualifying play-offs, generally written and/or categorized by the same editors, I saw that such grand-parent inclusions were generally omitted, with reason. Place Clichy (talk) 02:05, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per Marcocapelle's reasoning. Especially that we should not categorize relations of a country as those of later countries that split out of it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:48, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Belarus–Cambodia relations

Nominator's rationale: Newly-created category containing no articles and only a single subcategory about expatriate sportspeople in Cambodia which has existed since 2023 without this redundant parent category. Despite recent discussions at CfD these categories are continuing to be created quite rapidly. AusLondonder (talk) 20:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, bilateral relations categories should not just consist of expatriates or migrants which are only tangentially related to the topic. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:10, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete This category is an unneeded parent category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:49, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Barbadian expatriate sportspeople in Lithuania

Nominator's rationale: The single article in this category is already covered by multiple other categories: Category:Barbadian expatriate men's footballers, Category:Expatriate men's footballers in Lithuania,Category:Dutch expatriate sportspeople in Lithuania, and Category:Dutch expatriate men's footballers. This is unnecessary duplication. AusLondonder (talk) 19:39, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:13, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete The subject here is a Dutch national with a Barbadian father. He may technically legally fit this category, but we should base categories on realistic understanding of life histories not technical legal status. This is an unneeded excessive category. Since the lone subject has a Dutch mother, he is realistically a Dutch national of Barbadian deacent who was then a spirts expatriate. I have to admit the more I consider the issue the more I began to think we really need much tighter limits on who we put in expatriate categories. There are lita if aericles I previously put in expatriate categories that I now think wamere unwise placemenys. Part if ne almost thinks we should demetr expatriate categories and put everything in say Emigrants feom France to Italy or admit that if the move to Italy did not in some way rise to the level of emigration it does nit need the category at all. Anither part of ne thinks maybe we should merge French emigrabts to Italy and Frwnch expatriates in Italy into one category says emigrants and expatriates. However I know there is so much inertia in category soave thd somewhat overlapping emigrants and expatriates trees, both if whivh lead to a huge proliferation of narrow categories are going to stand.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Fictional vocalists

Nominator's rationale: Redundant to Category:Fictional singers and Category:Fictional rappers. Useless Niamh (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, it is not clear that the occupation of the fictional character in the only article is singer or vocalist. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:42, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Question is there a difference between a vocalist and a singer?John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:00, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Small headlands of Wales categories

Nominator's rationale: The category Category:Headlands of Wales currently contains no articles, only a container category containing eight categories, most quite small. I propose merging all these categories back into the Wales category. There are not enough articles to require sub-categorisation by county/borough. AusLondonder (talk) 14:33, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Missouri Tigers swimmers

Nominator's rationale: This category inappropriately redirects to Category:Missouri Tigers women's swimmers. Not all Missouri Tigers swimmers are women. I tried to add Mikel Schreuders to this category using HotCat and it put him in the Missouri Tigers women's swimmers. This redirect should either not exist or should redirect to Category:Missouri Tigers athletes. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 13:50, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete per name. Recommend creating a category for Missouri Tigers men's swimmers for above article and others, as appropriate. Billcasey905 (talk) 15:32, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Georgia (country)–South Korea sports relations

Nominator's rationale: Newly-created category containing three articles about the participation of Georgia at recurring sports events hosted by South Korea and two articles about the Soviet Union at the 1988 Olympics/Paralympics which are now being added to multiple bilateral categories for post-Soviet states. I'm seeking consensus that this must stop - that sporting participation articles regarding the Soviet Union should not be added to all bilateral successor state categories. AusLondonder (talk) 13:05, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, generally articles about the Soviet Union should not be added to categories about any successor state. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:49, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete These sports relations categories are a bad idea.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:04, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Norway–Uruguay sports relations

Nominator's rationale: Newly-created category containing only a single article, 2023 Tournoi de France, a football tournament in France in 2023 in which both Norway and Uruguay participated. This is completely inappropriate over-categorisation and certainly not defining. AusLondonder (talk) 13:01, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, mere participation to a sports tournament should not be added to a bilateral relations category. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:52, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:05, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Russia–San Marino relations

Nominator's rationale: Newly-created category about "bilateral relations" containing four articles about the participation of San Marino in recurring sporting events hosted in Russia and Unfriendly countries and territories list, which was added to 15 bilateral relations categories yesterday. AusLondonder (talk) 12:53, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, mere participation to a sports tournament should not be added to a bilateral relations category. And a list of 15 countries is certainly not about bilateral relations. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:54, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep. The fact that Russia placed San Marino by law on its Unfriendly countries and territories list as a retaliation to Russo-Ukrainian War stance, one of "just" 13 countries besides the whole of NATO and the EU, is certainly relevant to international relations between these two countries. Where would that content be placed if this category was merely deleted? This action would remove it entirely from the San Marino tree. Place Clichy (talk) 01:34, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Not every mention of a topic (like San Marino) in an article should translate to a category. For being mentioned we have the "what links here" feature. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:38, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete We do not need to categorize articles by every small detail mentioned in am article. We should nit have a set up where we categorize a list under each of 13 or more countries mentioned on the list.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:07, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ambassadors of Kiribati to Taiwan

Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Do not merge to Category:Ambassadors of Kiribati to China since we keep ambassadors to the People's Republic and to Taiwan separate. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:51, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Per nom. I removed this category from inappropriate placement in the otherwise C2F eligible Category:Ambassadors of Kiribati to China yesterday but was reverted. AusLondonder (talk) 12:59, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. The placement of this in the Ambassadors of Kiribati to China Category is just plain wrong. China refers to the People's Reoublic of China. Ambassadors serve from a country to a country. We should not be merging multiple countries into 1 Category. If we do not have enough Ambassadors to a specific country to justify diffusion we can place them in the Ambassadors of Foo and Ambassadors to Boo categories directly. This practice of creating literally hundreds of 1 article Ambassadors categories is actively hindering navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:13, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment there are only at present 2 people who served as Ambassadors of Kiribati as far as I can tell who have Wikipedia articles. Why Category:Ambassadors of Kiribati would need any sub-categories at all is nit evident to me. Evidently narrow Category is not much of a guideline at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:16, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Austria–Canada sports relations

Nominator's rationale: All of the articles in this newly-created category are participation articles from one country at the Olympics/Paralympics that happened to be hosted by the other country. This is not an example of "bilateral sports relations". I am unconvinced that most of these new bilateral sports relations categories solely containing recurring events hosted by a particular country should exist at all. We don't even have an article titled Sports relations. AusLondonder (talk) 12:48, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, mere participation to a sports tournament should not be added to a bilateral relations category. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:55, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:16, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Austria–Laos relations

Nominator's rationale: Redundant new category created in the last few days, containing no articles. It contains only the subcategory Category:Austrian expatriate sportspeople in Laos which has existed perfectly fine since 2022 without this unnecessary parent category. It doesn't even look like the sportspeople category should exist, because it contains two biographies on people who were managers and technical staff of teams in Laos for a couple of years. AusLondonder (talk) 07:52, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Finnish military snipers

Nominator's rationale: Single article cat Kingsmasher678 (talk) 04:23, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Industry in French Guiana

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layers with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 04:07, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Copper mines in the British Virgin Islands

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge single-article category and delete redundant category layers. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 03:59, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:58, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Convoluted, multi-layer category trees for a single article don't make sense and makes navigation actively more difficult. AusLondonder (talk) 13:16, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge and Delete we should have multiple articles per category, not a set of multiple categories with 1 article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:33, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Industry in the Cayman Islands

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 03:50, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • This also seems reasonable. Hmains (talk) 03:56, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Industry in Southeast Asia

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. I reparented most of its former contents as part of the current restructuring of industries/industry/manufacturing categories following previous CfDs. Mclay1 (talk) 03:35, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Industry in British India

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 03:02, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Industry in Bermuda

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation and "Industry" name is part of an old scheme that is being replaced. Mclay1 (talk) 02:55, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • this seems reasonable. Hmains (talk) 03:04, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Native American language films

Nominator's rationale: Clarity. There is no one "Native American language". Mclay1 (talk) 01:21, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename per nom. I have a slight preference for Category:Films in Native American languages because "by" would exclude articles directly in the category. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:07, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    That makes sense. Mclay1 (talk) 23:23, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete there is no Native American language and it is not a language family either. This feels like categorization by race which we disallow.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:34, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Cinema by language of Nepal

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container category with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 01:14, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Mass media by language of the United States

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge unnecessary category layers. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 01:12, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Mass media by language of Malawi

Nominator's rationale: Two container categories for the same one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation and not accurate to categorise these media under both countries. Mclay1 (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
I created both years ago.
Delete the one about Zambia can probably be deleted. I must have had a reason to create it then, but I see no reason for it to exist now, as I could find practically nothing that could be meaningfully added to it. That language is spoken in Zambia, but I couldn't find any articles that could be added to such a category. If some day such articles are written, the category can be recreated.
Keep the one about Malawi. I've reorganized it, and it's more helpful than it was a few hours ago. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 02:54, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
I still think the Malawi category is too small to be useful. One of the two new subcategories is already in the previous sole subcategory. If deleted, also delete Category:Categories by language of Malawi, which I've now tagged to this discussion. If kept, upmerge Category:Categories by language of Malawi to Category:Languages of Malawi, since it is a redundant category layer. Mclay1 (talk) 03:44, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:2Cellos members

Nominator's rationale: The two memers are interlinked via 2Cellos SMasonGarrison 01:03, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Non-Arabic-language mass media in Algeria

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layers with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 01:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Folk cellists by nationality

Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layers, upmerge for now. SMasonGarrison 00:07, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

March 9

Category:Pop cellists by nationality

Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. There are only two nationalities in here, which isn't very helpful for navigation, given that the entire tree has 8 people in it SMasonGarrison 23:41, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Slaves in colonial Pennsylvania

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. underpopulated category. SMasonGarrison 23:36, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

People killed

Nominator's rationale: Recently created and incompleted scheme. People can be killed by many things: murder, animals, disease, falling pianos. These subcategories of deaths are ambiguously named and no more specific than the parents. In two previous CfDs (here and here), the creator proposed renaming the "murdered" categories to "killed", for which there was no consensus, and the arguments against using "killed" still stand. (Note that these categories are non-diffusing subcategories, so deleting them will not result in the articles being lost from the deaths by year categories.) Mclay1 (talk) 23:35, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Support per nom. But it's probably worth considering making them redirects to People murdered in FOO to prevent them from being recreated unintentially. SMasonGarrison 23:37, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Women ambassadors of Nepal

Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry which is already in Category:Nepalese women diplomats. LibStar (talk) 21:54, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Bahamas–Dominican Republic sports relations

Nominator's rationale: Category containing only a single article, Bahamas at the 2003 Pan American Games. Simply because one country participated in a recurring event that happened to be hosted by another country does not require the creation of a category. This is not an example of "bilateral sports relations". I am unconvinced that most of these new bilateral sports relations categories solely containing recurring events hosted by a particular country should exist at all. We don't even have an article titled Sports relations. AusLondonder (talk) 21:42, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep. Let me try and explain the reasoning here. Sports diplomacy is a big thing, and countries put a lot of effort to attract and host multi-national sporting events such as the Olympics or the Pan American Games. So when a country sends a delegation so such an event, they definitely have a relation with the host country. To take a tragic but well-known example, would you say that the Israeli delegation at the 1972 Munich Olympics only had dealings with the IOC and not the local authorities? Note that this is only valid for sports delegations notable enough to have a Wikipedia article, not the main article about the multi-national event itself. Place Clichy (talk) 22:59, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    Using the extreme example of 1972 Munich doesn't explain or justify the mass inclusion of participation by every country at recurring events as part of "sports relations". Munich massacre is already appropriately categorised in bilateral relations categories. The article you link to, politics and sports already has its own category Category:Politics and sports. Category:Bilateral sports relations was created by yourself and has unclear inclusion criteria and unclear usefulness, particularly where categories just contain national participation at recurring events which happened to be hosted by a particular country. AusLondonder (talk) 07:43, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    @AusLondonder: To be clear, a root category was created (by me, but don't make this personal) back in 2021 for sports-related content that was already massively in bilateral relations category, precisely to keep that tree clean and better organized. I had used Category:Bilateral military relations as an example. This was 5 years ago, has not seen opposition since then and many such categories were created and populated by other users than me. Feel free to nominate the whole tree. Feel free to nominate the entire Category:Bilateral relations if you wish, because from your comments you seem to be in disagreement with this concept entirely.
    Unclear criteria? I'd say unclear is pretty subjective and the scope is pretty straightforward, but try: (A) what has to do with sports, country A, and country B and is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article or (B) the legitimate intersection of Category:Politics and sports (or Category:International sports) and Category:Bilateral relations, which pretty much comes down to the same thing.
    Lastly, I find it a bit discriminatory that some sports games would be worth inclusion in bilateral relations e.g. United States v Iran (1998 FIFA World Cup), which is in Category:Iran–United States relations since its very first version in 2019, and that the Bahrain-Trinidad and Tobago game (which is the original topic of this discussion) would not be worth that. I understand that this relation is understandably thin and there is little or no other content to place there, but it is nonetheless defining. Place Clichy (talk) 16:57, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    I'm certainly not making it personal. You say it is "discriminatory" for United States v Iran (1998 FIFA World Cup), described in our article as the "most politically charged game in World Cup history", to be in a bilateral relations category but not Bahamas at the 2003 Pan American Games. This is plainly illogical. The Iran v US game had enormous political undertones and was highly politically-charged due to the Iran-US relationship. The article is full of content relating to the political environment surrounding the game. Bahamas at the 2003 Pan American Games has zero connection to politics or foreign relations. That's not discrimination. You're comparing apples and oranges. AusLondonder (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    This was just an example of the hundreds of sports-related articles that were in plain non-specific international or bilateral relations categories. There is strictly nothing political about the History of rugby union matches between France and New Zealand, and yet this is an integral part of the relationship between these two countries, and, unsurprisingly, that article was added to Category:France–New Zealand relations the very day it was created. Can't we at least agree that this content is better off in a child category about sports that in the root with diplomacy, treaties and wars?
    I confused the situation in my last reply with the debate about the Bahrain-Trinidad game. To put a stone in your garden I am less convinced myself of the utility of the Bahamas–Dominican Republic category seen its actual content. Place Clichy (talk) 00:00, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:44, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete', even if sports diplomacy is a thing, mere participation in a recurring event is not an example of sport diplomacy. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:36, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment Place Clichy you are continuing to mass-create these categories adding only recurring events. There is no consensus for this so please stop. AusLondonder (talk) 07:55, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ireland–Turkmenistan relations

Nominator's rationale: Recently created category containing zero articles and only a subcategory Category:Ireland–Soviet Union relations which I don't believe it should be added to and contains no articles specifically about bilateral relations between Ireland and Turkmenistan. AusLondonder (talk) 21:16, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Weak delete without prejudice (as creator). I think that, like for any topic, history of bilateral relations belongs in bilateral relations categories. E.g. article Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand is rightfully in plenty of categories about Bosnia and Herzegovina, even though that country did not exist as a country in 1914. However, if there is no other content I see no harm in deleting this category for the time being, without prejudice against creating it again later when there is more content. Place Clichy (talk) 21:33, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. LibStar (talk) 21:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Strong delete The junk defence of these bad categories is just junk. Bilateral relations are between countries not between sub-units of countries even if those sub-units later became countries.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:46, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Leave the Soviet Union where it belongs, in the Soviet Union tree. Hypothetically someone might get the idea of putting all Soviet Union categories as subcategories of all successor states categories, but it would be a ridiculous action. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:41, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    @Marcocapelle Unfortunately that's what has been happening - see here, opposed by myself and another editor and here, again opposed by myself and another editor. @Place Clichy please acknowledge that this is opposed by several editors and stop doing this. AusLondonder (talk) 07:46, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Industry in Lombardy

Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:00, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Mclay1 (talk) 23:37, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Mobile computers

Nominator's rationale: rename, this is largely a topic category instead of a set category and the proposed name reflects this better. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:45, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Independent bookstores in California

Nominator's rationale: For consistency with most entries in parent category Category:Bookstores by country. Ideally other entries like Category:Independent bookstores in New York City, Category:Independent bookstores in Pennsylvania, Category:Independent bookstores in Washington, D.C., and other subcategories in Category:Bookstores of the United States can also be moved for more consistency across various category levels. --Another Believer (Talk) 02:45, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment, I am not per se against it in the current situation, but an alternative might be to rename the country categories to "in". Marcocapelle (talk) 06:59, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
    For the record, I have no opinion re: "in" vs. "of", I am just striving for consistency here. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:50, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose stores are in a place. The other categories should be renamed to use in.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:41, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
  • Support and rename all other out-of-sync bookstore categories to of. It may not apply so much to independent stores, but I believe the reason there is a category at Category:Bookstores of the United States is that all company categories (should) use of, because companies are categorised by where they are based. A company may have stores all over the world, but it wouldn't make sense to categorise a French company as a Malaysian company just because they opened a shop in Malaysia. So the company categories should be harmonised. Mclay1 (talk) 07:33, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 01:50, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 18:56, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Support making them consistent.SMasonGarrison 23:37, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Portable computers

Nominator's rationale: Merge as effectively synonymous. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:48, 6 February 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 02:32, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 18:56, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Films about crime

Nominator's rationale: Merge as effectively synonymous and forming loops with each other. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:50, 6 February 2026 (UTC)
  • It looks more something like Category:Film and crime rather than about crime films per se. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:02, 6 February 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment Crime film is a genre of film which belongs to fiction. My intention when I created this category was for it to cover true crime films as well, including docummentary films.★Trekker (talk) 22:07, 6 February 2026 (UTC)
  • Strongly Oppose the merging. Absolutely not the same thing, per StarTrekker and as a quick look at what the content of the category and subcategories include. Although most crime films include a crime and can be said to be about a crime, a number of films about crime are not crime films and should not be categorised as such. It would be better to fix the category mentioned by Marcocapelle .--~2026-33418-5 (talk) 17:07, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 02:33, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 18:56, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Cordiform manuscripts

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining. I believe that is this manuscripts that are heart-shaped. if not deleted, it needs more parent categories SMasonGarrison 04:31, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 18:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Arminian writers

Nominator's rationale: Based on the category description, I believe that the category creator intents for this category to be more narrow. I'm not convinced this passes EGRSD, but I'm not an expert in this area. SMasonGarrison 17:55, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
"@Smasongarrison Yes, the intent was for it to be narrow. But now that the theologians are included, it isn’t anymore. Would it be clearer to rename the category? I don't know, maybe." ---Telikalive (talk) 20:22, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comments, by far the most of the articles are about Arminian ministers (already categorized as such) who are notable because of their writings. I wonder why certain beliefs are explicitly excluded in the page header. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:49, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
    You'd have to ask the category creator. SMasonGarrison 22:56, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
    to Marcocapelle There are several slight variations in the definitions of Arminianism. However, all definitions formulated by Arminians exclude Semi-Pelagians, Pelagians, and Open Theists. Nevertheless, as shown in the last chapter of Arminianism, critics can from time to time make undue associations with these three positions. For this reason, clarification is necessary to prevent biased attempts at forced categorization.
    Concerning Eternal security, the article makes it clear that the main representatives of Arminianism — Arminius and the Remonstrants (Classical Arminianism), and Wesley (Wesleyan Arminianism) — rejected it. However, the popular term “four-point Arminianism” tends to suggest that Arminianism can be combined with Eternal Security as a legitimate variation of Arminianism. This also explains the category guidance note. ---Telikalive (talk) 19:36, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 18:54, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Industry in Schleswig-Holstein

Nominator's rationale: merge, only one article and one subcategory, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:54, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Mclay1 (talk) 23:44, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Industry in Lower Saxony

Nominator's rationale: merge, this is a set category of companies. (If not merged, then rename to Category:Manufacturing companies based in Lower Saxony.) Marcocapelle (talk) 17:52, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Agree with rename if kept per the changes to the industry tree. Mclay1 (talk) 23:45, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:17th-century American astronomers

Nominator's rationale: dual upmerge. underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 16:12, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Dual merge, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:16, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Bridges in Gdańsk

Nominator's rationale: Merge to parents. 1-article category, overcategorization. Gjs238 (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Hindu philosophers and theologians

Nominator's rationale: Do we really need to bundle these together? SMasonGarrison 12:06, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
In theory, not every Hindu theologian is a philosopher, but given that sources very rarely distinguish between philosophers and theologians in Hinduism, it would be optimal to retain the current category name. With respect to the nominator, DayakSibiriak (talk) 15:25, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Theologians has historically been exclusive Christian terminology and similar people in other religions were called philosophers. But the term theologian is nowadays applied to other religions as well. I expect it is going to be difficult to split this. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:13, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    I just think its easier for consistency with the other category trees if we were to split them. What about Early Hindu philosophers and theologians? SMasonGarrison 23:39, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    • It is not a matter of early versus modern, it is a matter of two terms being used interchangeably nowadays. For example the article Bidarahalli Srinivasa Tirtha uses "theologian" even while it is about a 17th-century person. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:48, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Of course, for a categorical tree it is simpler to have two categories, but, once again, it will be problematic for participants to distinguish between Hindu philosophers and theologians without sources and almost every name will have to be duplicated in both categories. DayakSibiriak (talk) 12:10, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Agree with DayakSibiriak's comments - sources often describe many as both and splitting will most likely create overlaps (and possibly editorial judgement). Asteramellus (talk) 22:55, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Industries in China

Nominator's rationale: merge duplicate. The default is "of" rather than "in". Marcocapelle (talk) 11:54, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Support in spirit, but I think a redirect might be helpful for maintenance. SMasonGarrison 23:40, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Unions of the Russian Empire

Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT. 2 articles there: Union of Unions which is a association of trade unions and United Nobility which is an organization to defend the rights of the landed gentry as landowners of agricultural estates, both in the period between 1905 and 1917. Another target for the second article may be Category:Business organizations based in Russia. Place Clichy (talk) 11:44, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Industry in Anhui

Nominator's rationale: delete, the categories only contain companies, and they are already in the tree of Category:Companies of China by industry. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:36, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Mclay1 (talk) 23:52, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Industry in Macau

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:28, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • This seems reasonable. Hmains (talk) 18:53, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Mclay1 (talk) 23:52, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:I-Kiribati expatriates in the United States

Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer containing only two subcategories, both of which contain only the same sole biography. Resident ambassadors by definition live in the country they're accredited to. Category:Ambassadors of Kiribati to the United States is already appropriately categorised in the Category:Ambassadors to the United States category tree. Also added the even more redundant parent category. AusLondonder (talk) 11:03, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Military installations of the United States in Denmark

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layers that just contain Greenland subcategories. Not helpful for navigation. As far as I can tell, the US has never had any military installations in Denmark other than in Greenland. Mclay1 (talk) 09:50, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge, there are just Greenlandic subcategories in here. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:26, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:American English-language television shows

Nominator's rationale: The parent category Category:English-language television shows was containerized per Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_January_19#Category:English-language_television_shows for the purpose of containing these country subcategories. However, their current names are ambiguous because they combine adjectives for language and nationality, making it unclear whether the nationality adjective modifies the head noun (television shows) or the language compound (English-language) That is, they potentially suggest these television shows are being grouped by local dialects of the English language (i.e. American English, British English, Canadian English, Indian English, Kenyan English, Philippine English, New Zealand English etc), when they aren't. They should be renamed to align with an established format for intersecting language and country/nationality: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_August_25#Category:Algerian_writers_in_French. And a side note: some of these categories (and other similar categories poppping up) should probably be discussed at some point in the future as being WP:OVERCAT. That has already been suggested at the top of Category:English-language television shows. Because, if anything, it may be defining when an American//British/Canadian/etc creative work is non-English, but the opposite is not true. Do we really need Category:English-language American films? Do we need Category:French-language French films? How about Category:English-language American writers? My guess is 'no'. But that is another matter. Οἶδα (talk) 07:43, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose: The current order sounds more natural to me, and I think it works better if the intention is for them to be divisions of Category:English-language television shows. The proposed order would make more sense if the nationality categories were divided by more languages. But either way does make sense. I understand the point about names like Category:American English-language television shows, but it's not technically ambiguous, because grammatically the hyphen means only the preceding word is the modifier; television shows in American English would be American English–language television shows with a dash per MOS:DASH. While that subtlety may not be obvious to many readers, I think it's unlikely many people would assume these categories were referring to regional variations of English. Mclay1 (talk) 10:06, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    While that subtlety may not be obvious to many readers,
    MOS:DASH is not only not obvious to readers, it is completely unknown to effectively 100% of readers. I don't know how we can say there is no ambiguity given that. Readers who see the word "American" immediately followed by "English" don't potentially read "American English"??? How can we honestly say that? The current construction does nothing to distinguish between the adjectives for language and nationality. What you are saying contradicts the previous consensus we had on these naming constructions. So should we now reverse all of those moves? This is the issue with CfD. Not enough consistency. We create a sliding standard from repeated CfDs with varying degrees of participation and, as such, varying results that can't be consistently applied. And you say "The proposed order would make more sense if the nationality categories were divided by more languages." What precludes them from being divided by more languages? Film categories are already divided as such: see Category:English-language films by country, Category:French-language films by country, Category:Spanish-language films by country, etc. If Category:Swiss German-language films was corrected to include a dash intead of a hyphen (as you alluded to), how would a category for films from Switzerland in the German language be named if not Category:German-language Swiss films? Οἶδα (talk) 21:21, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    I've struck my opposition based purely on the existence of Category:Swiss German-language films. While that category is named incorrectly (it should have a dash, and that name would be the correct name per the current format for films from Switzerland in the German language), it's a good example of when misunderstanding of punctuation could cause confusion. If we had both categories named correctly – one with a hyphen and one with a dash – they would be too similar to be immediately distinguishable. So rename. Mclay1 (talk) 00:08, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename. American English and French English in these category names could be understood as something completely different to what the scope actually is. These are for countries of production, not language variety (otherwise there is a French English language variant that i am not aware of). Place Clichy (talk) 13:50, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename to reduce ambiguity. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:American English-language novels

Nominator's rationale: These categories were just created and populated through a batch edit that was based on which language category (e.g. English-language novels) and country category (e.g. American novels) a given novel article was already categorised into. It was not populated based on which dialect of English each novel was written in, despite their names suggesting as much and the creator of them setting them up as such. Categorising each article based on which variation of English was used would be impossible to do as quickly as was done here, and likely still impossible even if one were to carefully consider each article before categorising it as such. Because I have yet to see an article that mentions American English as the language used, for example. Or British English, or Canadian English, etc. So by the very nature of how they were populated, these categories are not functionally language categories, but rather language+country categories. They should be renamed to reflect that. As for the configuration of the title I've proposed, it is aligned with the CfD consensus for categories named as such: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_August_25#Category:Algerian_writers_in_French. Οἶδα (talk) 05:34, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose to rename per my comment in the above discussion. They're not technically ambiguous if they're supposed to be country/language intersections. However, I would say we should delete them. Writers from English-speaking countries overwhelmingly write in English, and so that's not defining. If kept, these categories should be named consistently with the television ones in the other discussion. Mclay1 (talk) 10:08, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:10, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose to rename: As the creator of these categories, I want to clarify I never meant to make dialect-based categories but rather categories combining country and language criteria (so "American English-language novels" refers to English-language novels written by Americans). In fact, this was already the common use within the category: I took Category:Egyptian English-language novels, Category:Nigerian English-language novels, Category:Kenyan English-language novels, Category:Sudanese English-language novels, and Category:Sri Lankan English-language novels as references). Also, I think we don't need sources to back up the fact that the speech of Americans who write in English will fall within the umbrella of American English, and the same goes for New Zealanders, Brits, and so on. As for the "overwhelmingly" argument, I don't agree because there are lots of French-language Canadian writers, and there are some Spanish-, Irish- or Indigenous-language writers in the other countries mentioned, so I think this distinction could be useful in some cases (there are native Spanish speakers who write in English, for example, which could be pointed out). Anyway, I wouldn't mind changing the order of the constituents if everyone finds it easier to understand, I would just ask for all subcategories within Category:English-language novels to have a consistent order, as well as for Category:English-language television shows. Brunnaiz (talk) 12:28, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    I never meant to make dialect-based categories but rather categories combining country and language criteria
    Huh? Then why did you categorise all of them under the dialect categories: Category:American English, Category:British English, Category:Canadian English, Category:Australian English, and Category:New Zealand English? You even created an entirely new category for a dialect (Category:Hiberno-English) and added Category:Irish English-language novels and Category:Irish English-language television shows as its subcategories. That would seem to contradict what you are now saying here.
    Also, I think we don't need sources to back up the fact that the speech of Americans who write in English will fall within the umbrella of American English, and the same goes for New Zealanders, Brits, and so on.
    Well then, respectfully, you do not understand categorisation on Wikipedia. We categorise articles based on their defining characteristics, which are ones that reliable sources commonly and consistently refer to in describing the topic. And per WP:CATV, It should be clear from verifiable information in the article why it was placed in each of its categories. In other words, categories do not exist to introduce new information, but to group articles based on the information they already contain, in order to make navigation between them easier. As I mentioned above, you performed these category additions through a batch edit that was based on which language category (e.g. English-language novels) and country category (e.g. American novels) a given novel article was already categorised into. Just because an article was categorised into both of those categories does not automatically tell us which dialect a novel was written in. That is an assumption on your part.
    Regardless, the topic of this CfD is not about that, but about the ambiguity of adjectives in the category's name. Οἶδα (talk) 21:48, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete all These are so close to the full contents of novles from each country, that I think overlap rules would indicate we would be best off deleting each of these categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:37, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    I alluded to this in my renaming proposal above for American English-language television shows. Country and language are not synonymous characteristics because one does not automatically imply the other. However, when a country does not have a significant spread of languages, the language used would likely only be defining if it is not that country's prime language, i.e. English-language French films, German-language American writers, Spanish-language Italian singers. But the opposite is not true: French-language French films, German-language German writers, Spanish-language Spanish singers etc. For example, we kept English-language Canadian films per Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_February_11#Category:English-language_Canadian_films. With a quarter of the country speaking French, that leaves French-language Canadian films, which is more significant than a minor exception to the rule (overlap). If the intersection of language and novels requires diffusion then we can always diffuse by year, decade, century per WP:OCYEAR. Οἶδα (talk) 22:23, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
      • I do not think we should categorize singers by language at all. Singing in a language is far easier than speaking in it and in many cases is done by people who do not understand the language at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:49, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Latvian women screenwriters

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 04:36, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Rugby union teams by year of disestablishment

Nominator's rationale: Seems no obvious reason why this container would be so named when its 'mirror' which had already existed for 9 years is Category:Rugby clubs by year of establishment. I have no preference between club/team ('teams' seems to remove any potential disagreement over the inclusion of teams which are not clubs, but 'clubs' is in use for soccer and Australian types with no issues as far as I know) and while I would suggest not including 'union' is more practical as this would then allow rugby league organisations to be moved from the generic lists, its not a major issue for me either so the suggested name is absolutely open to amendment. The main thing is, surely there should be consistency between the establishments and disestablishments either way? Whichever is decided, the others in the other format could then be Speedy'd. Crowsus (talk) 04:32, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Bluegrass cellists by nationality

Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer. upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 03:31, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Terrorist incidents opposing military actions

Nominator's rationale: underpopulated category that's not defining for the only page in it SMasonGarrison 02:56, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:26, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete underpopulated category. However, I don't understand the statement that it's not defining for the article; opposition to military action was the motive for the terrorist attack. I'm not sure the category is named the best way though. Mclay1 (talk) 10:13, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    I was basing the defining more of the lead of the article rather than the whole thing. But I see your point. SMasonGarrison 23:41, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

March 8

Archaeological monuments in India

Nominator's rationale: merge/rename, many articles are unrelated to archaeology, these categories are placed in the wrong category tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:57, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Fictional storks

Nominator's rationale: Currently, none of the articles listed are for fictional storks. However, I noticed that there is no storks in popular culture category, so it would probably be best to turn this into one. (Oinkers42) (talk) 22:35, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. Storks have a long history in culture. There's bound to be some more content that can be added. Mclay1 (talk) 00:00, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Years in Portuguese India including (dis)establishments

More information more years ...
Close
More information more establishments and disestablishments ...
Close
Nominator's rationale: merge years to decades, mostly one- and two-article categories, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:25, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Matt Gaetz

Nominator's rationale: This category does not describe a useful defining characteristic of an article. It is also not a typical naming convention to create a category named after a person. MillSwamp (talk) 21:00, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Burundi–Georgia (country) relations

Nominator's rationale: Category containing no articles, only two subcategories. One is empty and tagged for deletion, the other is Category:Burundi–Soviet Union relations which itself contains only a subcategory containing about a single article on a Soviet diplomat who served in Burundi for six years until 1980. No connection with the modern country of Georgia. Useless and redundant. AusLondonder (talk) 20:41, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Soviet Union–Ukraine relations

Nominator's rationale: Most of the articles and subcategories here reference relations between the Russian SFSR and the Ukrainian State or the Ukrainian People's Republic. The Soviet Union itself wasn't established until the end of 1922, and Ukraine was part of it from beginning to end, so there were no bilateral relations to speak of. Charles Essie (talk) 20:36, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Manually merge, per nom, but not all content is about relations, e.g. the Russian Revolution in Ukraine is just part of Ukraine's history. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:18, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge as nom. There was a short-lived independent Ukraine ca. 1918-1920, and its relationship with Bolshevik Russia, including war, definitely belong in Category:Russia–Ukraine relations. Place Clichy (talk) 11:51, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Small special schools in England categories

Nominator's rationale: These categories are too small to be useful for navigation - county level categories containing only one or two article or district level categories containing only a few articles at best. These schools would be better categorised either within county-level categories or where the county-level category is too small, within the parent category. AusLondonder (talk) 19:36, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:22, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. The articles should also be in categories for the places. @AusLondonder: Have you checked if all the articles are already categorised in other school categories for the places? If not, it should be a dual upmerge. Mclay1 (talk) 00:08, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    @Mclay1: Yes, for any that wouldn't be in categories based on location if these are deleted I have nominated them for a dual merge. AusLondonder (talk) 01:51, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    Great. All good then. Mclay1 (talk) 06:21, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:People executed by Stuart England by hanging, drawing and quartering

Nominator's rationale: Stuart England redirects to Stuart period, but I'm not sure what wording is the most correct here. Gonnym (talk) 18:17, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Foundation schools in the Borough of Hartlepool

Nominator's rationale: Category containing only a single article, not helpful for navigation. Appears to have been missed at recent CFD nom. AusLondonder (talk) 18:06, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Also delete the intermediate layer Category:Foundation schools in County Durham, which will become empty, rather than waiting for a week for it to be speedy deleted, because it could end up repopulated. I've tagged it to this discussion. Mclay1 (talk) 00:13, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge and delete per above. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:01, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Religious terrorist incidents by religion and decade

Nominator's rationale: This category needs to be reorganized because right now it's just a jumble of all the different Religious terrorist incidents by religion that happen to have a decade SMasonGarrison 17:30, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose: The proposed name is already covered by Category:Terrorist incidents by religious groups (which should be renamed to this proposed name). I'm creating the missing layers for this category. I'm not necessarily opposed to things be reorganised, but as it stands, this category is named correctly. Mclay1 (talk) 00:29, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    Thanks for making the categories! For context, the category creator had requested that I make nominations to CFD instead of just explaining the problem on their talk page. SMasonGarrison 03:23, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Massacres of Muslims in Myanmar in 2017

Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge. Isolated category that is pretty redundant with Massacres of Muslims in Myanmar SMasonGarrison 17:17, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose merge: Category:Massacres in 2017 contains a very large number of categories. The category Category:Massacres in Myanmar could also be sorted by time there are some on the List of massacres in Myanmar that aren't in the category. Late Night Coffee (talk) 18:53, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
I used sort keys to order them by date. This seemed like a possibly useable middle step in future, instead of creating empty year categories in future? Late Night Coffee (talk) 18:55, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
This intersection is extremely narrow. An alternative might be to rename it to Category:Massacres in Myanmar in 2017, but limiting it to just muslims is pretty narrow. SMasonGarrison 03:25, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
That should probably be a parent category. But this would be the only thing in it? Late Night Coffee (talk) 05:50, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Category:Massacres in Myanmar
19th century
1930s
1940s
1980s
2000s
  • Depayin massacre – 2003 mob violence against the National League for Democracy in Sagaing Division, Myanmar
  • Saffron Revolution – Series of protests in Myanmar in 2007
2017 Category:Massacres in Myanmar in 2017
2020s
  • Kalay clashes – Series of clashes in Sagaing Region, Myanmar in (2021-present)
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Late Night Coffee (talk) 06:02, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename to Category:2017 massacres of Rohingya people in Myanmar – the year should go first (see Category:Massacres in the 2010s), and the name should more accurately reflect contents. While the scope does seem narrow considering there are no similar broader categories, there are five articles in the category, which seems like a notable amount for one year. I can't see any other articles to fit in if the category were renamed to broaden the scope, so it seems better to keep it specific and that way it can have the most appropriate parent categories without needing to add the same articles to multiple categories. Mclay1 (talk) 06:45, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    If the decision is to rename, this is a much better name. SMasonGarrison 16:04, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Note that the articles are already in Category:Rohingya genocide. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:13, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    I think it should be a subcategory of that. I've added it to that category. If renamed, the articles can be removed from the parent. Mclay1 (talk) 08:24, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Aromanian people in the Austrian Empire

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate underpopulated category with low potential. Created by Johnpacklambert to include two articles. In one of them he replaced Category:Austrian people of Aromanian descent for this category. "Austrian Empire" refers to a political entity that lasted from 1804 to 1867. The other aforementioned category can cover from as early as 1282 with the Habsburg monarchy up to the modern Austrian state; the category in fact already functioned this way. Same principle with Category:Hungarian people of Aromanian descent (mentioning it as Hungary was part of Austria for centuries, including during the Austrian Empire), which can cover from 1000 with the Kingdom of Hungary up to the modern day.
I don't think we need this category when we already had the other two. No need to fix what is not broken. There's already been an issue with this user and the categories of this topic area before . Super Ψ Dro 15:51, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep This is an acceptable sub-category of Category:People from the Austrian Empire by ethnicity. The Austrian Empire was a multi-ethnic state. We categorize people who lived in the Austrian Empire for being in the Austrian Empire. We categorize people by the political unit thry lived in. The Austrian Empire was a unified political unit and we categorize people for bring resident in that empire.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:31, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Note: except for this one , all of the subcategories there were created by this user. This practice, while not seemingly disputed until now, was also not approved by consensus from what it seems. Most of these subcategories are underpopulated, they're far under their potential. The vast majority of fit articles currently use "descent" categories. Super Ψ Dro 19:45, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Can we merge/redirect the category to Category:Austrian people of Aromanian descent to prevent this from occurring again? SMasonGarrison 03:26, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, only two articles in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. No objection to recreation of the category when a few more articles can be added. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:18, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete. This was created as a POV duplicate of Category:Austrian people of Aromanian descent which properly defines these individuals. The Austrian Empire, and succeeding Austria-Hungary, were indeed multi-ethnic states. However, the Aromanian homeland is in a part of the Balkans that was never Austrian, and Aromanians were never a major ethnicity in the Austrian Empire. Place Clichy (talk) 12:28, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Cyprus Institute of Marketing

Nominator's rationale: Non-notable university containing only one article. Main article was deleted. Mclay1 (talk) 14:07, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:22, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete Was thinking of nominating this myself after the PROD. Serves no purpose. AusLondonder (talk) 18:25, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Sport in Mongolia by populated place

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge unnecessary category layers just for one city. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 13:59, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Rugby union teams by country and populated place

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container category with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 13:52, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Sports clubs and teams in Kara, Togo

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant categories with only one subcategory each. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 13:50, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Sports clubs and teams in Botswana by populated place

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container categories with only one subcategory each. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 13:46, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Restaurants in Brazil by populated place

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container categories with only one subcategory each. Not helpful for navigation. The Pakistan city subcategory is already in a Pakistan region category. Mclay1 (talk) 13:38, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Companies based in Baku by industry

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layers with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 13:33, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Companies of Azerbaijan by city

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container categories with only one subcategory each. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 13:31, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Defunct sports venues by country and populated place

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge unnecessary container category with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 13:10, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Cable cars in Sweden

Nominator's rationale: 2-article category (over categorization). Alternatively, rename to Aerial lifts in Sweden as per naming scheme used in Category:Aerial lifts by country. Gjs238 (talk) 12:28, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Museums in Armenia by populated place

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container categories with only one subcategory each. Not helpful for navigation. The Sri Lankan city subcatcategory is already in a district category. Mclay1 (talk) 11:22, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Organisations based in Mali by city

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant category layers with only one subcategory each. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 11:07, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Universities in Botswana by populated place

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container categories with only one subcategory each. Not helpful for navigation. The Indonesian city category is already in an Indonesian region category. Mclay1 (talk) 11:00, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Histories of cities in Uruguay

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge unnecessary container category with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 10:53, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Belarusian city councillors

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container category with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. The subcategory is already in another subcategory of Category:Belarusian politicians. Mclay1 (talk) 10:21, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Kazakh politicians by populated place

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container category with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 10:21, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Government of Astana

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge unnecessary category layers just for two articles. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 10:15, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:British television commercials

Nominator's rationale: In British English, "advert" is the usual word used for TV advertising instead of "commercial", as most of the articles in this category attest. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:15, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Alt rename to Category:British television advertisements per the main article Television advertisement. "Advert" is common, but it's short for "advertisement", and we should use the full word, which is what is used in the disambiguation for many of the articles. Mclay1 (talk) 10:27, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Politics by city in Mongolia

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge unnecessary container categories with only one subcategory each. Not helpful for navigation. Not every country has or needs its own category with this format, and not every city category is or needs to be contained within a category like this. Mclay1 (talk) 09:45, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Gastronomy by country and city

Nominator's rationale: Redundant container category with only one subcategory, which is already in other country and city categories. Not helpful for navigation. No merge needed. Mclay1 (talk) 09:39, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:American silversmiths (companies)

Nominator's rationale: Clarity and following standard format in Category:Companies of the United States. This is a subcategory of Category:American silversmiths, part of the tree of Category:Silversmiths, which is not disambiguated. The article Silversmith is about the profession. There is no article for Silversmith (company), so this use of disambiguation is non-standard. This is the only category named this way and isn't part of a wider tree of silversmith companies. Mclay1 (talk) 09:14, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Culture of Botswana by city

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container category with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 03:04, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Political terrorist incidents

Nominator's rationale: This entire tree is redundant. All terrorism is inherantly political. The definition is "the use of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological aims". As it stands the entire tree is just a redunant layer with nationaliistic terrorist incidents SMasonGarrison 02:48, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
The contrasting category is religious terrorism. They are defined separately in some definitions. The intent was to include far-right, far-left, and anarchist. Alternatively it could be "secular terrorism". I somewhat intended to split it after seeing what I found. The reason for creating it is that the Category: Terrorist incidents by decade set it broken up by country and by year. This made it very time consuming to dig though to sort by ideology. I wanted to dig through once to sort everything by ideology. Late Night Coffee (talk) 03:22, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
If terrorist incidents are to be diffused by ideology, I think it's better to just use more specific categories rather than grouping ideologies into more category layers. Religious can be a subcategory without needing a corresponding non-religious counterpart – being non-religious is a given by not being categorised under religious. Mclay1 (talk) 09:19, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Putting them in more specific categories would mean many of those categories contain just one event, or the "by time" span would be too broad to be useful. The second one is probably more compliant with the category guidelines? We could do ideology by century and then narrow any to decade after we see what is there. Late Night Coffee (talk) 09:02, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Split: Left + Right + Anarchist
That covers everything at the top level excluding religious?
Category:Terrorist incidents by political orientation
Right-wing Category:Right-wing terrorist incidents (3 C, 32 P)
Left-wing – Category:Communist terrorist incidents (7 C, 12 P)
Nationalist – Category:Nationalist terrorist incidents (21 C, 2 P)
Anarchist – Category:Propaganda of the deed(3 C, 31 P)
Late Night Coffee (talk) 12:26, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete/merge per nom. Religious terrorism is political too, it is taking religion into the world of politics. If the nationalist subcategories can't be populated any better they'd better be upmerged too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:48, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
    Yes, it was a suboptimal "misc" category.
    Are there a set of ideologies that cover everything not covered by religious? Left, right, and anarchist? Late Night Coffee (talk) 05:33, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment User:Smasongarrison, it looks like Category:Political terrorist incidents in the 1970s was overlooked when you tagged categories involved here or it was just created since you posted this discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 01:28, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    Thanks for catching it. I probably missed it. I'll add it SMasonGarrison 02:10, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:ISIL attacks on non-Muslims

Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated and Non-defining intersection between organization, specific kind of violence, and subject being non-muslim. I'm nominating because the category creator has explicitly expressed their preference for that procedure SMasonGarrison 02:04, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
For context, see User_talk:LateNightCoffee#PLEASE_STOP!, User_talk:LateNightCoffee#March_2026, User_talk:HouseBlaster#I_need_an_uninvolved_opinion.SMasonGarrison 02:17, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Comment: I accidentally marked the counterpart when trying to merge an incomplete set of years.
"* 01:45, 8 March 2026 Smasongarrison talk contribs deleted page Category:ISIL attacks on Muslims (G7. Author requests deletion) (thank)"
Late Night Coffee (talk) 02:17, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
What does that mean? And why is it relevant to this nomination? SMasonGarrison 02:17, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Well, per the user's request, I've undeleted the category, and then nominated it for dicussion. SMasonGarrison 02:38, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Thank you. The reason is I can see how the negative category might fit the definition of "non-defining" but the other seems valid. It is also an important topic. Late Night Coffee (talk) 02:55, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Important is not the same as defining. Not everything should be a category. WP:CLN SMasonGarrison 02:59, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
I agree "non-Muslims" probably is not defining; that should be spoilt, but the Category: Violence against Muslims tree is well established. Late Night Coffee (talk) 14:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Split Category:ISIL attacks on non-Muslims
into:
Category:ISIL attacks targeting foreigners in Muslim countries.
  • Russian:
  • Chinese
  • "targeting" is because they often had more local casualties
  • the examples I've found are an in Kabul, but I've not looked much.
Category:ISIL attacks on Sikhs
Category:ISIL attacks on Christians
Category:ISIS-linked attacks on Jewish targets
  • already exists, maybe rename
Late Night Coffee (talk) 14:37, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Health in Nigeria by state

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant container category with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 01:11, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Finnish women criminologists

Nominator's rationale: Dual upmerge for now. underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 01:08, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:27, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Medicine by country subdivision

Nominator's rationale: Only two subcategories, neither of which is "Medicine in [a country subdivision]", and one is already in the parent Category:Health care by country subdivision. No upmerge needed. Mclay1 (talk) 01:07, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

March 7

Category:Academic staff of the Munich University

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate category created last year. AusLondonder (talk) 23:41, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Republic of Venice people

  • Nominator's rationale Most sub-categories already use people from, lawyers from etc. I think the proposed form is more clear and flows better.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:37, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:58, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename per nom. Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 14:35, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Rename per nom. I thought we'd already done this. There are definitely some others that should be renamed along the same lines. Mclay1 (talk) 06:11, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Manufacturers by product type

Nominator's rationale: The parent is Category:Manufacturing companies. The subcategories of this are named inconsistently, mostly "manufacturers", sometimes "companies" and more rarely "manufacturing companies". At the very least the first and third should be uniformised. 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:22, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Of course standardize the naming. It might help to add more categories to the nomination in order to avoid different discussions with possibly different outcomes. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:01, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Bosnistics

Nominator's rationale: Proposing this as original creator - reason: to follow naming convention. ౪ Santa ౪99° 19:38, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Single-member non-resident ambassadors

Nominator's rationale: More non-defining categories about non-resident ambassadors, many of whom had concurrent accreditation to a significant number of countries. All contain only a single article and are therefore completely useless for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 19:03, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete since all articles are in other sub-cats of the applicable Ambassadors of X categories. We would want all contents to be in that category since being an ambassador of a given country is generally defining. If we had few enough articles we might Merge to Diplomats for X country and the overall ambassadors category. Keep in mind Ambassadors are not default notable, so some ambassadorial appointments we will have few articles for.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:38, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:04, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:SMALLCAT Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 14:41, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    • Smallcat is no longer a guideline. It was replaced by narrowcat. Which removed the exceptions for "likely to grow" and "part of a widespread system".John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:40, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Video games based on Batman: The Animated Series

Nominator's rationale: Only contains two articles. Should also be merged into the other parent categories, excluding Category:Warner Bros. Games franchises. (Oinkers42) (talk) 19:01, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Multi merge per nom, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:06, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Portuguese musical groups by populated place

Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. redudant category layer SMasonGarrison 17:59, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Brazilian scholars

Nominator's rationale: redudant category layer. SMasonGarrison 17:53, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Musical groups from Campinas

Nominator's rationale: multiple upmerge for now. underpopulated cateogry SMasonGarrison 17:50, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:08, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Rappers from Salvador, Bahia

Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 17:48, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Kingdom of Gujarat

Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer, the subcategory suffices. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:42, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 17:39, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Per nom, not useful for navigation. AusLondonder (talk) 19:10, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Unlicensed Nintendo hardware

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. All these Nintendo hardware clones are unlicensed. If there is intended to be a distinction between the categories, it's not clear and doesn't seem important. Category:Nintendo Entertainment System hardware clones and Category:Super Nintendo Entertainment System hardware clones can be made subcategories of Category:Unlicensed Nintendo hardware. (This is a follow-up to a previous CfD that ended in no conensus due to lack of participation.) Mclay1 (talk) 13:35, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 17:38, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Kings of Gujarat

Nominator's rationale: rename per Chaulukya dynasty, and it is unclear if they were called "King of Gujarat" at all. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:44, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 17:37, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Question do we need Gujarat in the title. We not just Chaulukya kings?John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:21, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • That is a fair point, Category:Chaulukya kings is fine too. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:03, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Category:Algeria–Zambia relations

Category:United States-South Yemen relations

Category:Anti-Argentine sentiment

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. (non-admin closure) Servite et contribuere (talk) 15:22, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Category containing no articles but three subcategories. One about a football rivalry, one about an 1800s colonial war and another about a territorial dispute in the 1970s. None of these categories belong in a parent category about "anti-Argentine sentiment". AusLondonder (talk) 15:06, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, wars and territorial disputes should certainly be purged. If there would be some really appropriate content we might leave the questionable football rivalry subcategory alone, but that is not the case. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:05, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, as per Marco. Coeusin (talk) 20:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
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:Anti-Belizean sentiment

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. (non-admin closure) Servite et contribuere (talk) 15:28, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: New category containing four articles relating primarily to a border dispute and none of which could be accurately characterised as examples of "Anti-Belizean sentiment". AusLondonder (talk) 14:58, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, territorial disputes do not belong in a sentiment category. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:07, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, as per Marco. Coeusin (talk) 20:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
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:Soviet Azerbaijani people

Nominator's rationale: rename per precedent in this earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:43, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Socionics

Nominator's rationale: Redundant category with only two items: a pseudoscience and its author. --Altenmann >talk 07:21, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, the two articles are already directly interlinked. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:39, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ambassadors of the Federated States of Micronesia to China

:*Merge Category:Permanent representatives of the Federated States of Micronesia to the United Nations to Category:Ambassadors of the Federated States of Micronesia and Category:Permanent representatives to the United Nations

  • Nominator's rationale These are too narrow of categories. Each one has 3 of less articles. DespiteAmbassadors if the Federated States of Micronesia having 17 by country sub-categories, there are only 7 biographies and 2 lists in the category. Putting all the biographies in Category and having a lists sub-category I think is enough categories. The current set up makes navigation between articles harder.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:23, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge but also to the "relations" parent categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:04, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment I do not think biographies should go in the relations categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 08:52, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment I think some of the categories should probably just be deleted, as many cover non-resident ambassadors. The article Masao Nakayama is current in seven ambassador categories, such as Category:Ambassadors of the Federated States of Micronesia to Indonesia (of which his is the only article). He was a resident ambassador in two places. AusLondonder (talk) 15:13, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep. I wonder how one can consider that Category:Permanent representatives of the Federated States of Micronesia to the United Nations is not defining. No objection to upmerge categories populated only by non-resident ambassadors, though. Place Clichy (talk) 16:28, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
    • I did not say these categories were not defining. I said they were too narrow. Splitting a category with 7 biographies in it at all seems a case of making excessively narrow categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:18, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment I have dropped the UN cat. Permanent Representatives to the UN and different enough from Ambassadors we can make them a non-diffusing sub-cat of Ambassadors and have people in both that cat and also the Ambassadors cat if they were also Ambassadors. It should be kept in mind that none of these positions fall under politician notability. We only per guidelines have articles that are Backes by multiple sources that are secondary, reliable, created by 2rd parties and the multiple sources need to be intellectually independent from each other. They also need to provide substantial coverage of the subjects. I have not read the articles in question in detail so I do not know they meet those guidelines. However due to the fact the inclusion criteria is not the a reliable source supports the statement the subject held this office that applies to articles that pass basic politician notability, we cannot assume we will end up with articles on all ambassadors.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:00, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations

Nominator's rationale: Recreation of a past deleted category CFD. Delete per WP:SMALLCAT, not a single article currently in this category belongs to this as another already exist: Category:Works about the Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations which also make this redundant TruthGuardians (talk) 03:15, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, the subcategory suffices. If the overview article is kept (which seems unlikely) a See also note to that article can be added on the subcategory page. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:32, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep. Thwre is no subcategory. The deletion is way out of date. We really need this category given the all the different pages. This category helps readers find related pages about Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations in one place, such as the 1993 case, the 2005 criminal trial, and the Robson/Safechuck litigation, which is scheduled for trial in November 2026. Categories exist to help readers move between closely related topics.Bhdshoes2 (talk) 12:21, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete, we already have existing articles about the allegations in 1993, 2005 & 2019, and a category for them, it's not necessary to have another category Never17 (talk) 02:42, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • I do not see any articles about the 1993 case, the 2005 criminal trial, and the Robson/Safechuck litigation apart from what is already in the Works category. If they exist, please add them to the category, then we can re-discuss. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:52, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
    ok I am adding them now but user:TruthGuardians keeps deleting them from Category as you will see on the talk page for each. Bhdshoes2 (talk) 17:14, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
    ok I added the category to the 1993 and 2005 pages. I also restored an old page on the Safechuck litigation that I helped created and gave it same category. That had been redirected to the 1993 allegations page by User:TruthGuardians a couple yrs ago but I didnt pursue why as this is a contentious topic. Bhdshoes2 (talk) 17:28, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • No subcategory, that is weird. I have added Category:Works about the Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations now as a subcategory, that should already have happened. Of course it won't matter if the deletion goes ahead. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:48, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
    Just a note: same editor who initiated this CfD based WP:SMALLCAT has removed the category from at least two clearly relevant pages during the discussion (1993 accuser page and fbi files on jackson page which is literally about fbi files on sex crime accusations). Removing the category while the deletion discussion is active changes the apparent usage of the category and is going to put the cart before the horse here. The whole point of the cat is to pull together relevant pages. Bhdshoes2 (talk) 11:03, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Ok, discounting the overview that is likely going to be deleted, and discounting the two articles that are already in the subcategory, we are left with four articles and a subcategory. That should be enough to keep. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:58, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete the Jackson FBI files are not specifically about the allegations but all investigations related to Jackson including assassination attempts and tape that had nothing to do with Jackson. The 4th page current in this category is a fork and likely will be deleted. castorbailey (talk) 04:10, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
    I don't see the logic of keeping a category called "Works about the Michael Jackson Sexual Abuse Allegations" and systematically deleting a category called "Michael Jackson Sexual Abuse Allegations." Of course the FBI files page covers abuse allegations. If we delete this category how will readers know the full scope of pages?
    " Bhdshoes2 (talk) 17:11, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
    The FBI files page doesn't cover abuse allegations per se rather numerous FBI investigations related to Jackson. As for the Works category they can create dozens and dozens of TV specials and books about the allegations, that is not the same as the allegations themselves. You created two new pages, both up for deletion/redirect to justify this category. The only two pages legitimately falling into such cat is the 1993 allegations and the Trial page, both of which covers all notable allegations. castorbailey (talk) 13:57, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Edit With all due respect, even suggesting the Jackson FBI files page is not about this musician's alleged sex crimes is ludicrous. Also, 1993 was 33 years ago. The trial was 21 years ago. This isnt WP:SMALLCAT anymore. At least 8 have filed suit since then, which is all over mainstream press, but editors have been very successful in scrubbing. Five new accusers are all over the presss of the past week which is why Im trying to make sure this encyclopedia project reflects that. Also SMALLCAT being 4 is just a guideline. Even if folks manage to strip the category down to just two “permitted” pages, the 1993 case page and the 2005 trial page, it still represents a clear, distinct topic.The aforementioned eight other accusers have filed in 2013, 2014, 2016, and 2026, and a trial is recently set for November, so the category remains relevant, SMALLCAT is not a numeric rule, and it helps people navigate this info now scattered around Wikipedia. We are supposed to believe a topic so salient that it has spawned, what, 9 documentaries under the "Works about alleged abuse" category doesnt deserve its own cat? Illogical. This topic is many different accusers popping up over 33 years, tons of films, different narratives. It is calling out for a category. 13:46, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Bhdshoes2 (talk)
    Refrain from WP:BLUDGEONING. I said the FBI files page doesn't cover abuse allegations per se rather numerous FBI investigations related to Jackson. Similarly it shouldn't be in extortion category despite part of the investigations was about extortion or terrorism category despite the FBI looking into the trial becoming a possible terrorist target. The five from the Cascio family are not new accusers, their case was first reported in 2024, the seven (not eight) posthumous plaintiffs have sufficient coverage in the two existing pages, the trial is a possible future event and WP:CRYSTAL applies and I told you why works about allegations is not the same as the allegations themselves. One can produce 20 films about even just one allegation. castorbailey (talk) 19:34, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete because for the exact same reason it was deleted for in the past. WP:SMALLCAT is still present here.MraClean (talk) 20:12, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
    on SMALLCAT, if helpful, here are the pages to which I would add it:
    1. 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations
    2. Trial of Michael Jackson
    3. FBI files on Michael Jackson
    4. Safechuck v. MJJ Productions (which is in a redirect dispute)
    5. Overview of Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations (which has been nom'd for deletion)
    Bhdshoes2 (talk) 00:31, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep: There's enough there to warrant it being a category now. TheBritinator (talk) 02:28, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete the category's creator created two WP:NPOVFORK pages to justify the creation of this category. PinkSlippers (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:19, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    False. (And i mentioend my work on those already above) There are five new accusers in the past two weeks appearing in notable press. That is why I created the overbiew page. The lawsuit page I created years ago and just learned how to challenge the blank-and-redirect; additionally there are tons of new developments Bhdshoes2 (talk) 01:25, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    I didn't say when you created that page, just that you created it to increase the number of wikipages focusing on the allegations so you could argue for this category. You didn't have consensus to create this page as a standalone then and you don't have it now either. It's a WP:NPOVFORK. The five "new" accusers are hardly new when they were publicized in September 2024 and that didn't justify such an overview page more than today. WP:NOT PinkSlippers (talk) 22:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    huh? The Cascios filed a lawsuit last week for first time! I don't keep up with the deep dive blogs if there were murmurs before that and they usually are unreliable for Wiki. It was definitely not in mainstream press. Ps - and I had no idea what SHORTCAT even was in 2023 when I made page Bhdshoes2 (talk) 22:44, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete Two pages unquestionably belong in that category but that's against WP:SMALLCAT. The other three are highly questionable, two appears to be up for deletion and created by the same user who is campaigning for this category. So for now delete. Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 14:22, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete. The nominator is correct. The category was Small Cat when it was deleted. Since then, nothing has changed to warrant its recreation. Israell (talk) 04:36, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Terrorist incidents by decade and continent

Nominator's rationale: This category is a mix of "Terrorist incidents by decade and continent" (e.g. Terrorist incidents in the 1970s by continent) and "Terrorist incidents by continent and decade" (eg. Terrorist incidents in Africa by decade) should be in. Per the category creator's request (User_talk:LateNightCoffee#March_2026), I've nominated the category for splitting rather than just explaining the issue on their talk page. SMasonGarrison 02:25, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
Support I combined them to avoid over categorisation, but if it should be two sets I have no objection to splitting this. Thank you for being specific and constructive. Late Night Coffee (talk) 02:38, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
@Smasongarrison, I think I have now worked out part of what I'm doing wrong? In an attempt to annoy you less, I've been focusing on creating a smaller number of categories, but this is possibly not a useful metric. Could my "not understanding diffusion" be an excessive avoidance of over-categorisation? Late Night Coffee (talk) 02:53, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
I appreciate you thinking about this. I think that it takes a lot of time to figure out where the misunderstanding is. I suspect it would extremely helpful if you started trying to use the language of the categorization policies and guidance. That would be helpful to try to figure out what the disconnect it. I do not know how to concisely untangle "excessive avoidance of over-categorisation". SMasonGarrison 03:48, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
Generally when you have nominated something here I have usually understood you. When you write on my talk page, I get more confused. I think it's because nominating things here requires being specific. Late Night Coffee (talk) 05:09, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Overcategorization mostly Wikipedia:Overcategorization#Narrow_intersection.
I was using the wiki terminology. Late Night Coffee (talk) 05:14, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ambassadors of the United States to South Yemen

Category:Ambassadors of Russia to Zimbabwe

Category:Ambassadors of Algeria to Greece

  • Nominator's rationale all these categories have 1 or 2 articles. They are too narrow. No objection to deleting any articles from a given Ambassadors to Category where the person was a non-resident ambassador or the appointment is otherwise not defining after the mergers. Also no objection to removing articles from Category:Ambassadors of Algeria if the article remains in a sub-category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:36, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom but also merge to a "relations" parent. That applies to previous nominations too. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:49, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
    • I do not think we should merge biographies to the relations category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:01, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
      • We should make an exception here. Ambassadors are the very first thing you expect to find in a relations category. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:43, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
        • This would create even more Category clutter. Especially since some Ambassadors have 5 or more appointments. I think it is enough if we have them in say Ambassadors of Algeria and Ambassadors to Yugoslavia. That is already 2 categories for 1 position. I think that is enough.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:00, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
      Re: I do not think we should merge biographies to the relations category it is a very good reason to keep a separate ambassadors category, even if small. Place Clichy (talk) 16:41, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment The 2 articles in Category:Ambassasors of Algeria to Yugoslavia are in 3 and 5 categories based on ambassadorial appointments. I believe for now it is enough for the articles to be in Category:Ambassadors to Yugoslavia. I think as long as the article are in that category we have categorized them enough based on having a connection to Yugoslavia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:11, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment At least in the case of Category:Algeria-Zambia relations the only thing in that category is the Ambassadors sub-cat, which in turn consists of 1 article. Merging the article there will just create another too narrow 1 article category. I do not think that is a wise choice.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:17, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep. If these positions are defining, and being a resident ambassador of Algeria in Greece certainly is, then these categories are useful even if they have only a handful of articles. Wikipedia wasn't built in a day. Per the nominator's own argument that biographies of ambassadors shouldn't be directly placed in e.g. Category:Algeria–Greece relations, and per WP:COPSEP, the ambassadors categories should be retained. Place Clichy (talk) 16:41, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
    • There is not a "handful" in any of these categories. There is 1 or 2 articles. It is enough to have them in Category:Ambassadors of Algeria and Category:Ambassadors to Greece. It goes against the guidelines of narrow Category for there to be articles with 1 or 2 categories when we can cover the subject matter with a larger category just as well that will actually allow navigation to related articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:43, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
    By this logic, you remove the articles from the tree of Category:Algeria–Greece relations, without replacing it by anything. There's no reason to do that. Place Clichy (talk) 20:53, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
        • Well to take the example of Category:Ambassadors of Algeria to Zambia the article merely says the years the subject was ambassador to Zambia without saying anything at all about what he did as ambassador. I think having him in Category:Ambassadors of Algeria and Category:Ambassadors to Zambia is more than adequate categorization based on the actual contents of the article. It says nothing about Algerian Zambian relations at all. There is the added issue that some countries have more sub-categories than total articles under The Ambassadors of that country Category. Beyond this, because of BLP issues it is really not a good idea to create cases where there is only one article that is in a category that is a biography of a living person. Yet we have hundreds if not thousands of cases of this with ambassador articles. I have also seen cases where someone who was a diplomat but not an ambassador was incorrectly placed in an ambassador category and removing him or her took a Cfd nomination because of there being only 1 article in the category. 1 and 2 article categories are structurally bad ideas which is why we have narrow category guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:06, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ambassadors of Algeria to Argentina

Older discussions

The above are up to 7 days old. For a list of unclosed discussions more than seven days old, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All old discussions. For older closed and unclosed discussions, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Previous 8 to 21 days.

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI