Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 February 17

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). GoldRomean (talk) 17:40, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:People executed the Netherlands by guillotine to Category:People executed by the Netherlands by decapitation

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge single article category. Not helpful for navigation. There's clearly a typo in the title, which I tried to fix at speedy; however, it was pointed out that the category is not needed. The execution of the person in the category occurred during the Incorporation, when the Netherlands was part of the First French Empire, but some of the structure of the previous Dutch government was kept intact. So it's questionable whether they were executed by the Netherlands or France or both. The article is already in Category:People executed by the First French Empire by guillotine. If people think they weren't killed by the Netherlands, just delete the category. Mclay1 (talk) 23:29, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge to Category:People executed by France by guillotine since the execution was catleried out by France. We group executions by the country under whose authority they were performed which in this case was France. From 1810-1815 the area was under French control. That we should not question. The Kingdom of Holland was a French satellite state as was the Batavian Republic but thry were seperate. After 1810 the area was part of France and we should accept that especially in a category so clear tied to government action.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:48, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  We don't need to merge there. As I said, it's already in a French category. It's either upmerge or delete. Mclay1 (talk) 06:47, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete in the spirit of what Johnpacklambert says: the Netherlands was annexed by France when the execution took place. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:07, 18 February 2026 (UTC)
• Comment I have no objection to deletion.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:11, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• @Johnpacklambert: I guess you mean no objection to deletion. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:46, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• Yes that is what I meant.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:47, 19 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Chairpersons of the National Assembly (Nepal). (non-admin closure) GothicGolem29 (Talk) 23:33, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose renaming Category:Speakers of the National Assembly (Nepal) to Category:Chairpersons of the National Assembly (Nepal)

Nominator's rationale: Speaker is not an officeholder of National Assembly (Nepal). The Chairman/Chairperson conducts business in the house. PenGear (talk) 23:22, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Rename per nom to align with Chairperson of the National Assembly (Nepal). Mclay1 (talk) 00:27, 18 February 2026 (UTC)
• Rename per Mclay1, it seems that this could have been listed at speedy. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:09, 18 February 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.

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). GoldRomean (talk) 17:41, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose deleting Category:Disestablishments in Pakistan by administrative unit (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Establishments in Pakistan by administrative unit (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. No merge needed, the subcategories are already in all appropriate other categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:07, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Potentially the subcategories could also be directly in Category:Establishments in Pakistan/Category:Disestablishments in Pakistan so they don't get lost in the centuries tree, but either way, we don't need a container category for one subcategory. Mclay1 (talk) 00:20, 18 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). GoldRomean (talk) 02:23, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Croatian dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Dialects of Serbo-Croatian
• Propose merging Category:Serbian dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Dialects of Serbo-Croatian

Nominator's rationale: What defines what is a dialect of Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, or Serbian? Whether a given dialect is spoken within a given country of these four? This is not applied to any other language, and even if it were, it would be best to apply it as Category:[lang] dialects of [country]. Arctic Circle System (talk) 20:48, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge, trivial intersection. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:15, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure). GoldRomean (talk) 20:23, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

• Propose renaming Category:Albanian dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Albanian-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Armenian dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Armenian-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Azerbaijani language dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Azerbaijani-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Dialects of the Bulgarian language (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Bulgarian-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Czech dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Czech-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Danish dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Danish-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Dutch dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Dutch-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Dialects of English (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:English-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Estonian dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Estonian-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Finnish dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Finnish-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:French dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:French-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:German dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:German-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Irish dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Irish-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Dialects of Italian (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Italian-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Japanese dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Japanese-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Korean dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Korean-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Lithuanian dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Lithuanian-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Dialects of the Macedonian language (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Macedonian-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Malay dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Malay-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Dialects of Maltese (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Maltese-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Norwegian dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Norwegian-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Persian dialects and varieties (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Varieties of Persian
• Propose renaming Category:Polish dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Polish-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Portuguese dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Portuguese-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Russian dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Russian-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Slovak dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Slovak-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Slovene dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Slovene-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Spanish dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Spanish-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Turkish dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Turkish-language dialects
• Propose renaming Category:Ukrainian dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Ukrainian-language dialects

Nominator's rationale: Disambiguate dialects of languages named similarly to nation-states and their demonyms from dialects spoken within said nation-state per discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 February 4#Category:Azerbaijani language dialects. Current proposal is to move relevant categories to Category:[lang]-language dialects as with Category:Hokkien-language dialects, though Category:[lang] language dialects as in Category:Azerbaijani language dialects, Category:Dialects of the [lang] language as in Category:Dialects of the Bulgarian language, or Category:Dialects of [lang] as in Category:Dialects of English may also be acceptable. This can also be extended to categories for languages named similarly to cultural regions and their demonyms if needed. Serbo-Croatian-related categories will be covered in a separate CfD. One possible argument against this is that this doesn't often cause confusion and related articles are not often titled this way. I am not fully sold on this myself, but I figure it warrants discussion.

Category:Persian dialects and varieties should also be shortened to Varieties of Persian similarly to Category:Varieties of Greek Arctic Circle System (talk) 20:40, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Rename per nom, except I am not sure about the deviating proposal for Persian. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:18, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  May I ask why that is? Arctic Circle System (talk) 22:34, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  According to the article Persian language, there are three varieties of Persian, and the rest are dialects. Wouldn't the new name be inaccurate? I'm not sure why the Greek category is named so differently, but it seems to be a different case. Mclay1 (talk) 00:16, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  Pahlavani, Hazaragi, Dehwari, Bukharian, Judeo-Persian, Muslim Tat, and Judeo-Tat are also frequently treated as languages. Additionally, even if there were just three Persian languages and a bunch of Persian dialects, "Varieties of Persian" would still be sufficient to cover that as "varieties" in linguistics is a neutral term which refers to both languages and dialects as a group along with sociolects, cants, etc. Arctic Circle System (talk) 08:13, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose move not needed, proposed name is longer, and doesn't change much, the existing one are perfectly understandable.Marcelus (talk) 08:24, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  They're not all perfectly understandable though. Category:Irish dialects could easily mean dialects of English in Ireland. Mclay1 (talk) 14:17, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• My preference would be for "dialects of [lang]". I'm surprised Category:Welsh dialects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) isn't included in this proposal, as that's a perfect example of the ambiguity this is trying to solve (dialects of Welsh vs dialects of English from Wales) – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:57, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  I wasn't sure whether to include languages of eponymous regions as that could include languages within regions named after the relevant ethnolinguistic group (i.e. Talish (region) and Kurdistan), and I don't know if those should be included. Then again, various nation-states were also named in this manner, so it might make sense to discuss whether the scope should be expanded. Dialects of [lang] also sounds like a better option. Arctic Circle System (talk) 20:48, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

• Rename per nom. The naming format should be standardised, and we need to disambiguate language from nationality. "Dialects of X" could work fine but sounds a little wordier. Mclay1 (talk) 14:14, 18 February 2026 (UTC)
• Rename we want it to be clear we are grouping these by language thry are a sub-unit of not by country where they are spoken.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:28, 1 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure). GoldRomean (talk) 17:41, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose renaming Category:Dielects of Maithili language to Category:Maithili dialects

Nominator's rationale: Consistency with related categories, though if Eastern Maithili and Thēthi aren't enough to justify the category, then merge up (Angika and Bajjika's relation to Maithili is more controversial, categorizing them as dialects should probably be avoided for now. Arctic Circle System (talk) 20:17, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:22, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Comment User:Arctic Circle System, if you tag a category to be part of a CFD discussion, please remove a CSD C1 tag at the same time as that is no longer valid. thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:46, 19 February 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.

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). GoldRomean (talk) 17:41, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Dialects of Tajik to Category:Tajik language

Nominator's rationale: Only one applicable page as of now. Arctic Circle System (talk) 20:08, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete, no need to merge since the article is already in Category:Judeo-Tajik dialects. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:24, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  That category should also be merged given it only has one article. I am surprised I missed it. Arctic Circle System (talk) 22:35, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  • Feel free to nominate it too. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:18, 18 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: No consensus * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:47, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

• Rename Category:Russian patrons of music to Category:Patrons of music from the Russian Empire
• Nominator's rationale all 3 people in this category were nationals, citizens or subjects of the Russian Empire. Many people who were subjects of the Russian Empire would not have self described as Russian. We want to group this category by people being subjects of the empire. I have no objection to having a Russian Category for people who are subjects of Russia, but all these people were subjects of the Russian Empire so naming the category based on its actual contents makes the most sense.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:18, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:28, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose splitting hairs. Maria Kalergis was a subject of Russian Empire yet she is in Category:Polish patrons of music. Shall we move it to Category:Patrons of music from the Russian Empire as well? Or [[Category:Patrons of music from Congress Poland? --Altenmann >talk 23:04, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  In defense of such an approach, the Congress Poland category would be a subcategory of the Russian Empire category. I do not think this approach is a good idea though. Arctic Circle System (talk) 08:16, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  • Maria Kalergis should be in a patrons of music Category that sorts her by being a subject of the Russian Empire. She might also beong in the Polish Category as well, but she needs to be in one that sorts her by the country she was a subject of.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:12, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

• Comment This category is eventually a sub-catrgory of Philanthropists. Currently Category:Philanthropists from the Russian Empire has 76 articles. More may have been (since all Russian Empire people are dead) patrons of the arts than the 3 in this category. I do not know.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:18, 21 February 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose. Russian is a nationality epithet, not an ethnic one. It is not restricted to Russians in the ethnic sense. People from the Russian Empire would certainly have described themselves as Russians, or at least Russian subjects. One can be in a Russian... and a Polish... category at the same time if needed, and supported by the article's reliable sources. Lastly, one shouldn't try to guess people's national feelings based on their last name. Place Clichy (talk) 22:27, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

  Russians is primarily an ethnicity. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:53, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

  You could say the same about French people, Germans or Americans. The fact that these articles about peoples exist does not change the fact that nationalities are primarily treated as nationalities. Nations are made of many aspects, ethnicity and citizenship are two of them among several others, and none are exclusive. Place Clichy (talk) 23:29, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

  Either way all the articles here are on people who were subjects of the Russian Empire. It makes sense to call categories based on their actual contents.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:40, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

  Hence, Category:Russian patrons of music. Place Clichy (talk) 17:55, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

  • • • • • These are subjects of the Russian Empire. Thry should be categorized as such. My Russian history professor went off on how inaccurate it was to call non-ethnic Russian people from the Russian Empire who never self-identified as "Russian" Russian. I think we should follow such expert views, especially when all the contents to a category are people who are more clearly defined as from the Russian Empire. We would be best off to name categories to reflect their actual contents.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:32, 1 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: no consensus. There aren't really arguments to weigh here—nobody presented sourcing backing up claims about what is/isn't defining. There were also some suggestions for deletion or alt renaming, but those failed to attract significant support. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:22, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

• Rename Category:People murdered in 1511 to Category:People killed in 1511.
• Rename Category:People murdered in the 16th century to Category:People killed in the 16th century
• Rename Category:People murdered in the 1510s to Category:People killed in the 1510s
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1513 to Category:People killed in 1513
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1516 to Category:People killed in 1516
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1519 to Category:People killed in 1519
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1520 to Category:People killed in 1520
• Rename Category:People murdered in the 1520s to Category:People killed in the 1520s
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1529 to Category:People killed in 1529
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1530 to Category:People killed in 1530
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1533 to Category:People killed in 1533
• Renane Category:People murdered in 1536 to Category:People killed in 1536
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1537 to Category:People killed in 1537
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1542 to Category:People killed in 1542
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1543 to Category:People killed in 1543
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1544 to Category:People killed in 1544
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1548 to Category:People killed in 1548
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1560 to Category:People killed in 1560
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1563 to Category:People killed in 1563
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1567 to Category:People killed in 1567

• Rename Category:People murdered in 1571 to Category:People killed in 1571
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1572 to ;Category:People killed in 1572

• Merge Category:People murdered in the 18th century to Category:People killed on the 18th century
• Merge Category:People murdered in the 19th century to Category:People killed in the 19th century
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1800 to Category:People killed in 1800
• Rename Category:People murdered in the 1770s to Category:People killed in the 1770s
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1801 to Category:People killed in 1801
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1803 to Category:People killed in 1803
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1804 to Category:People killed in 1804
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1805 to Category:People killed in 1805
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1805 to Category:People killed in 1806
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1807 to Category:People killed in 1807
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1808 to Category:People killed in 1808
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1809 to Category:People killed in 1809
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1810 to Category:People killed in 1810
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1811 to Category:People killed in 1811
• Rename Category:People murdered in 1812 to Category:People killed in 1812

• Rename Category:People murdered in 1815 to Category:People killed in 1815

• Nominator's rationale The people murdered categories have too many borderline cases that make Neutral Po8nt of View application difficult. I think we would be better off it we just sort people killed by year. The borderline cases are: 1. People killed in what was ruled self-defence. 2. People killed by terrorists, are they all muder victims. 3. Slave owners killed by slaves. 4. People killed by soldiers as part of an occupying force. 5. People killed by rebels in what is scene as an execution but the Rebellion fails and it is then treated as a Murder. 6. The line between Murder by a mob and execution is often very thin. 7. Which is someone killed in a duel. 8. What about people killed by people who are not quite clear if they are acting as militia or civilians in a case that is not actually clear if it is during a war or not. I could expand more. Some cases even go to trial but later people may not agree with the ruling. Sometimes it is also not clear if the trial says the killing was not a Murder or uf the jury is just not sure the accused performed the murder. If we use killing and group all people killed by the actions of others regardless of how legal or not legal the killing was we avoid a huge amount of having to determine legal status while categorizing. We will also make the categories less narrow, which a lit of there are right now. James Cook clearly goes in the People killed in category, saying he was murdered I think is a judgement that goes beyond what we can adequately say. There are lots of borderline cases.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:40, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment I will try to nominate more of these categories tomorrow. A huge number of these categories at present have only 1-2 articles. With the change in scope many will bd larger. We may not need all years but I think we should revisit that once we know how big these categories are.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:48, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

  @Johnpacklambert some of those are misspelled; they say "Catrgory" instead of "Category" - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 20:50, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

  • I reviewed over these to try to catch any misspellings multiple times. I will review them again.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:52, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
• Rename, especially in older times with less developed legislation the difference between murder and killing is not always as clear. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:44, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose, simply being killed is not defining. Killed by what? "Kill; to deprive of life : cause the death of, e.g. a disease that has killed thousands" This would also include people who were killed by animals, killed by falling rocks, killed by disease, by anything. Killing does not require human involvement. If it is described by the sources as murder tag it as murder. If not, do not. We do not create a nonsense intersection of anyone who has died based on a force, whether it be animal, man, or natural causes. Princess Diana was killed in a car crash. She would go in this category too, as would be anyone who was killed by lung cancer, killed in a dog attack. Not defining. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:53, 6 January 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose per PARAKANYAA and per WP:C2C – See Category:Murder. This is an established terminology, see also content of Category:Murder victims by country. People who were not murdered simply do not belong here, there is no reason to rename existing categories for that. FromCzech (talk) 10:04, 6 January 2026 (UTC)
• Comment The name is short for "killed by people". This is the standard way killed is normally used. I have given a whole slew of cases that are borderline. Keep in mind that murder is so narrow it does not include all cases reported as homicides. Murder does not include any killing that was ruled self-defence. If we are not going to merge them every Category by year pre-1860 needs to be upmerged to the by decade categories since not one of them includes even 5 articles and a huge number of them include only 1.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:06, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

  No, it isn't. Killed just means dies from a specific active force. People are killed by things that are not other humans. When someone says "my husband was killed", they are not implying murder. When I hear people killed by something, I think of killed by a cause, which I would generally think to be animal, accident, disease. The first example the dictionary has is a disease, and all of the examples they give, are not murder! There is no reason the category would not apply to disease victims, or those killed in car crashes, which is not a defining intersection. If cases are not described as murder by sources do not include because it is not defining.

  Yes, so it isn't defining for self-defense. Because murder and self-defense killings are not the same thing and the latter is not defining. General homicides vary widely in cause and grouping them together is not defining.

  No, it doesn't need to be merged, because that is not an absolute rule, and even if it did, this would not fix that? PARAKANYAA (talk) 13:12, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

• Rename per nom. Even if murder is a more satisfying attribution I have to accept the pragmatic difficulties in clear differentiation. -- Just N. (talk) 01:57, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

  You realize that this would then have to be merged into the "deaths in x year" category, correct? "Killed" covers all deaths that are the result of something, and there is not a meaningful distinction between that and "death" generally, resulting in this having 1-1 overlap with the deaths in year category. PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:35, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

  • • No killed means someone killed you. Either an intention killing, or killing in war, or an execution. It is distinct from death.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:08, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

      No, it doesn't. Refer to the dictionary. Any dictionary. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:06, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

      Oxford Language: "cause the death of (a person, animal, or other living thing).

      "her father was killed in a car crash"

      Merriam-Webster: "to deprive of life : cause the death of

      a disease that has killed thousands"

      cambridge: "to cause someone or something to die:

      Her parents were killed in a plane crash."

      These are the primary examples - not one is about a person killing a person. Where are you getting this completely unrelated meaning of kill? We can't just decide words mean other things. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:08, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

• I notified WP Crime of this discussion. PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:48, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
• Find a new name or delete - per concerns over the word "murder", noted above. The point about not using "killed" as a standalone term, has merit as well. Perhaps these should use "by" in their names? Something like: Category:Deaths by people, with subcats like Category:Deaths by people in 1801. Other suggestions welcome. - jc37 06:42, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
  • We could use Category:People killed by people in 1812, etc.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:40, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

    Well, that wouldn't be defining. People killed by people is not defining, but the specific kinds of killings, e.g. murder is defining, but someone being killed in another person by an accident is not. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

  We already have these categories, it is Category:1982 deaths and such. This is specifically for people who are the victims of a crime called murder. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:10, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on what to do with the Killed in FOO categories?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ^SMason_Garrison 18:43, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Comment I explained in detail why in fact "murder" is not defining, because there are too many cases where if it was or was not murder is not defining. I believe that being killed by another person is defining and it is the only standard we can consistently apply with a truly neutral point of view.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:16, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  But "killed" doesn't specify killed by another person. People can be killed by animals or falling rocks. Mclay1 (talk) 00:08, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  • Which is why I suggested the alternate name Category:People killed by other people. What is clear is that murder has too many issues with what qualifies that having a category using that name will not hold up under NPOV guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:27, 18 February 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.

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) GoldRomean (talk) 02:24, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Kazakh-American culture in New York City to Category:Kazakh-American culture

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. underpopulated category ^SMason_Garrison 18:27, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Just delete, the only article is not about culture. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:30, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Delete I do not think consulate grneral articles go in the culture tree.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:20, 21 February 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.

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). GoldRomean (talk) 17:43, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete Category:German-language Austrian singers

• Nominator's rationale If propery applied this would be close to all Austrian singers. German is the standard language in Austria, so much so that even people who may sing in other languages are almost certainly going to sing in German. We do not have Category:German-language German singers or Category:English-language American signers or several other related categories for the exact same reasons. This violates the guidelines on not having heavily overlapping categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:34, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Delete, not a defining characteristic of Austrian singers. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:15, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Merge to Category:German-language singers. While the intersection may not be defining, the language they sing in still is, and they shouldn't be lost from that tree. Mclay1 (talk) 23:59, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• @Mclay1: German-language German singers are "lost" from that tree too. It isn't any different for Austria than it is for Germany. There is a notification about that on the page of Category:German-language singers. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:24, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  Fair enough. Seems a bit random, but it is applied consistently to other languages too. Mclay1 (talk) 14:06, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• Comment I would go so far as to argue that language sung in is not defining at all. People can and do regularly sing in languages they do not understand and can not communicate otherwise in. It is a key reason the average number of language categories for singers is far higher than for any other occupation we have language categories for. In writing, including song writing, to create content in the language requires knowledge of it. Singing in a language requires less skill in it than acting. Yet for the most part we do not categorize actors and actresses by language. I really think we should not categorize singers by language either. However there may be a few rare categories where singer by language might be justified. So I doubt a full scale nomination would work, people would hard on a few isolated cases that might be justified and use that to kill the larger nomination. I think what might work is picking either a large or all the categories for a particular country and choosing them for deletion.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:23, 20 February 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.

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 Discounting Scanlan's comment for failing to articulate any argument at all, the consensus here seems to be that since non-resident ambassadors are frequently ambassadors to multiple countries the specific country they are an ambassador to is not a defining characteristic. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:47, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of the United Kingdom to Nauru (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of the United Kingdom to Tuvalu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of Canada to Fiji (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of Canada to Kiribati (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of Canada to Tonga (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of Canada to Samoa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of Canada to Tuvalu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of Malaysia to Nauru (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of Malaysia to Tonga (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of Malaysia to Kiribati (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of Malaysia to Tuvalu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of India to Tonga (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of India to Tuvalu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of the Federated States of Micronesia to Tonga (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of the Federated States of Micronesia to Samoa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of the Federated States of Micronesia to Nauru (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of the Federated States of Micronesia to Kiribati (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of the Federated States of Micronesia to Tuvalu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of the Federated States of Micronesia to Vanuatu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of the Federated States of Micronesia to the Solomon Islands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Romania to Brunei (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Romania to New Zealand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Romania to Samoa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Romania to the Solomon Islands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Romania to Kiribati (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Romania to Vanuatu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Romania to Tuvalu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Romania to Nauru (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Romania to Fiji (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:High commissioners of New Zealand to Nauru (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Canada to Palau (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Canada to the Marshall Islands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Canada to the Federated States of Micronesia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Sweden to the Marshall Islands (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Ambassadors of Sweden to the Federated States of Micronesia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: These category ecosystems are completely unnecessary and useless. The article Alik Alik has been added to eight single-member categories relating to non-resident accreditations held by one an ambassador. Nineta Barbulescu has been added to nine. Yes, nine categories exist for one person, doing one job. This is textbook over-categorisation. AusLondonder (talk) 17:07, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete These are overcategorizations for sure. Some other cases where we have 1 article categories for resident ambassadors we would want to upmerge to parent categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:37, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  I’m working on populating the Swedish categories. Can I recreate certain categories if they contain more than one article? Saftgurka (talk) 18:16, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  • The issue of the above categories is they are about non-resident ambassadors, it is not about number of articles per se. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:20, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

    I see. A lot of small nations mainly have non-resident ambassadors. They’re still accredited to the country in question and visits the country regularly. How should they be categorized then? Saftgurka (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  • • • • I would say that most defining thing about ambassadors is the sending country. So all ambassadors should be in Category:Ambassadors of the United States; Category:Ambassadors of Sweden; Category:Ambassadors of Uganda; Category:Ambassadors of Hinduras etc. Splitting by receiving country should only be done as it is defining and needed to help navigation. Also keep in mind that ambassadors are not default notable. To even have an article we need to have multiple reliable sources providing in depth coverage. On the other hand if someone is notable mainly for something else we would still have an article on him or her being an ambassador. The example that comes to mind the fastest is Shirley Temple Black, who is primarily notable for her earlier career as a child actress, but was later a US ambassador and for a time chief state department protocol officer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:23, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:20, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Keep At least the Swedish categories that now contains three articles. Saftgurka (talk) 16:30, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete Swedish categories too, since the articles about ambassadors in Japan. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:15, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

  I think you have misunderstood what a non-resident ambassador do. They go through the same procedures and ceremonies as a resident ambassador with presenting credentials to the head of state. They spend a significant amount of time (up to months of the year) in the country. But they don’t live there. For example, Sweden has had 19 non-resident ambassadors to Madagascar. Why shouldn’t we have categories for that? Saftgurka (talk) 18:10, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

• Because many non-resident ambassadors hold a half dozen on more appointments at one. We generally categorize people by occupation, not be every job they ever held. Let alone by every single duty of their job. My cimurrebt job I am at the sane time head of giving the CASAS test, head of taling with peiple about the enrollment process, and a career coach who works with people while they are in the program. Those are 3 distict duties but we would not want 3 distinct categories. John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:24, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

  There may be more categories to delete than you might have thought. Category:Ambassadors of the United States to Saint Lucia contains 16 articles, none has been a resident ambassador; Category:Ambassadors of the United States to Dominica, contains 16 articles, none has been a resident ambassador; Category:High commissioners of the United Kingdom to the Maldives contains 13 articles, none has been a resident high commissioner; Category:Ambassadors of the United Kingdom to Palau contains 14 articles, none has been a resident ambassador. I can give you many more examples. Saftgurka (talk) 15:52, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

• Keep - Most of these deletions target small countries. Scanlan (talk) 02:07, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
  • How is that relevant? Narrow category guidelines mean we should almost never have categories with only 1 article. Also, placing articles in a half dozen or more categories for holding one position is excessive.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:42, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

  It's not about "targeting" it's about the usefulness (or lack of) of categories with single articles. AusLondonder (talk) 08:17, 2 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). GoldRomean (talk) 02:24, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Kazakhstani road movies to Category:Road movies

Nominator's rationale: underpopulated category, upmerge for now ^SMason_Garrison 16:23, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge per nom, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:23, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). GoldRomean (talk) 02:24, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:American womens basketball podcasters to Category:American basketball podcasters

Nominator's rationale: While I'm not sold that podcasting is defining for most of these articles, I do not see any value in separating them by gender. User:Namiba 16:04, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

These are podcasters about the WNBA as opposed to the NBA. They all just happen to be women. Dresq23 (talk) 02:42, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• Question Are these people who are women who are podcasting about basketball, or are these people podcasting about women's basektball? Or are they podcasters who happen to have played women's basketball?John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:40, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
  • Looking through the articles the first two do not seem to mention podcasting at all. We would be best advised to sort people by the subject of their podcast. However we should only have these categories for articles that actually mention the subject is involved in podcasting.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:49, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  Presumably it's for podcasting about women's basketball. Even if kept, it would need renaming to correct the missing apostrophe. Mclay1 (talk) 23:56, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  They are WNBA podcasters. Dresq23 (talk) 04:28, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge per nom, without prejudice to purging or deletion insofar it is not a defining characteristic of these articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:25, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Merge for now, without prejudice against further mergers or removing articles that does not apply.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:14, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Merge per nom. Mclay1 (talk) 23:56, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure). GoldRomean (talk) 02:24, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose renaming Category:Historical scientific instruments to Category:Obsolete scientific instruments

Nominator's rationale: The current category description says it's for instruments developed "at some point in the past", which is all instruments. The cut-off for "historical" is arbitrary, and it's irrelevant how long ago something was created, unless we're specifically dividing by period. A better scope is instruments that are no longer commonly used, which fits most of the current contents, and the category is already a subcategory of Category:Obsolete technologies. Any instruments that are still in common use can be placed somewhere else in Category:Scientific instruments if they're not already. Mclay1 (talk) 12:38, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Rename, sort of a WP:C2C nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:27, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). GoldRomean (talk) 02:24, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Historical location names in Taichung to Category:Former subdivisions of Taiwan

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge single-article category. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 12:12, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:29, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge/delete/rename. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 02:29, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Episcopal churches by populated place (0) to Category:Anglican church buildings by populated place
• Propose deleting Category:Episcopal churches by century (0)
• Propose deleting Category:Episcopal churches (0)
• Propose renaming Category:Episcopal chapels (0) to Category:Anglican chapels

Nominator's rationale: WP:SHAREDNAME. Episcopal is the name used by Anglicans in some locations, esp. the U.S. and Scotland. There is otherwise no common feature for these categories that would differentiate them from parent Anglican categories besides the shared name. Having an artificially constructed parallel Episcopal category tree is not an improvement for navigation. Note that individual categories related to the U.S. should continue to use the word Episcopal. Place Clichy (talk) 10:58, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge/delete/rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:39, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). GoldRomean (talk) 02:24, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Episcopal churches in the United States to Category:Episcopal church buildings in the United States
• Propose merging Category:Episcopal churches in California to Category:Episcopal church buildings in California
• Propose merging Category:Episcopal churches in Washington, D.C. to Category:Episcopal church buildings in Washington, D.C.

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate categories. No visible difference between these categories as articles are about individual local churches. Place Clichy (talk) 10:45, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:41, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Merge per nom. The established format is unfortunately "church buildings". Mclay1 (talk) 23:45, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Fortunately I would say because the term "church" is ambiguous. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:29, 18 February 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.

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) GothicGolem29 (Talk) 23:34, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose deleting Category:Historic vehicles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. This is a hodge-podge of different vehicles only connected by being "well-known throughout the world". Mclay1 (talk) 09:02, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:42, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:India economy stubs. (non-admin closure) GothicGolem29 (Talk) 23:35, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose renaming Category:Indian economics and finance stubs to Category:India economy stubs

Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content, it is about the economy of India, not about the study of economics in India. Comparable with Category:Brazil economy stubs. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:28, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Rename per nom. Mclay1 (talk) 09:10, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). GoldRomean (talk) 02:25, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Lists of selectmen in Massachusetts to Category:Selectmen in Massachusetts, Category:Massachusetts select board members and Category:Lists of people from Massachusetts

Nominator's rationale: merge for now, currently only one article in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:13, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. Mclay1 (talk) 09:10, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  • Support--User:Namiba 15:57, 18 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge (leave redirect). (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 02:29, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Polish-language toponymic surnames to Category:Polish toponymic surnames

Nominator's rationale: Essentiallty same. I guess, accidental CFORK (non-Polish-language Polish toponymic surname probability minuscule, so hair-splitting makes no sense.) --Altenmann >talk 06:22, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge per nom, but better keep a redirect. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:46, 17 February 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.

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). GoldRomean (talk) 02:25, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose deleting Category:Bhojpuri films featuring Sujit Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:PERFCAT. Per longstanding consensus, we do not categorize films for individual actors in their casts. Films very routinely have a dozen or more cast members, so this would lead to extreme category bloat as every film on the planet was added to a category for every individual cast member in it. Bearcat (talk) 04:46, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Fully agree with you about your rationale. My motivation for creating this new category was that Sujit Kumar, is celebrated as one of Bhojpuri cinema's most distinguished figures for his enduring contributions to the industry.^[1][2] Scholar165 (talk) 13:10, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:48, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  Fully understand your support of the nominator's rationale. My motivation for creating this new category was that Sujit Kumar, is celebrated as one of Bhojpuri cinema's most distinguished figures for his enduring contributions to the industry.^[3][4] Scholar165 (talk) 13:11, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  @Scholar165: That's information that can be included in articles about Sujit Kumar and Bhojpuri cinema. He already has a filmography in this article. Unfortunately, we just can't make these kinds of categories. No actors have them. Mclay1 (talk) 23:41, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete actor is a non-defining characteristic of a film. --Altenmann >talk 13:29, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. While I don't agree that this is trivial or non-defining, WP:PERFCAT is a long-standing convention and applies to all actors. There would be far too many categories for every actor to have one, and it would be arbitrary or subjective to decided which actors can and can't have one. Mclay1 (talk) 23:43, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you for the explanation. I agree with all of you who have recommended the deletion of this category. Again, thanks to all for taking the time to help me understand why this deletion was necessary.  Scholar165 (talk) 10:44, 18 February 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.

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) 22:28, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose deleting Category:Frankie Valli (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: With minimal content, this is an unnecessary eponymous category per WP:OCEPON. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 04:35, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Delete you got the valid point that this leads to overcategorization, although I'm the one who made that category. Inajd Inajd0101 (talk) 05:57, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:49, 17 February 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.

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). GoldRomean (talk) 02:29, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose deleting Category:Historic sites in progress (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is a non-standard maintenance category, intended to be added manually to articles rather than through a template. All articles are works in progress. Small articles can be tagged as stubs, and articles needing work relating to a particular topic can be tagged on their talk page using the relevant WikiProject assessment scale. Mclay1 (talk) 03:54, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete, as the maintenance message is totally unclear. You might understand it as "help needed to improve the article" or as "don't touch because other editors are working on it". Marcocapelle (talk) 06:56, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). GoldRomean (talk) 02:29, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Local nature reserves in the United Kingdom to Category:Local nature reserves

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge redundant later. Local nature reserve is a designation specific to the UK. Mclay1 (talk) 03:46, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge per nom although a disambiguator e.g. Category:Local nature reserves (UK) may still be helpful. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:00, 17 February 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.

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) GothicGolem29 (Talk) 23:35, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose deleting Category:Historic parks, heaths and woods of Norfolk (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: It's unclear what makes these two places "historic" compared to others in Category:Parks and open spaces in Norfolk. There are already specific categories for heritage lists, such as Category:Grade II* listed parks and gardens in Norfolk. The articles are already categorised appropriately so no merge is needed. Mclay1 (talk) 03:37, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:01, 17 February 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.

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) GothicGolem29 (Talk) 23:36, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose deleting Category:Historic machinery (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The category contains only one article: Wheel and axle, which is a machine still very much in use. Whether or not an invention is "historic" is arbitrary. Mclay1 (talk) 03:27, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Delete, an arbitrary designation indeed. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:02, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). GoldRomean (talk) 02:29, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Hotels in Portugal by city (0) to Category:Hotels by city and Category:Hotels in Portugal

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge container category with only one subcategory. Not helpful for navigation. Mclay1 (talk) 03:21, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. The subcategory could be nominated too. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:04, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Heritage hotels. (non-admin closure) Servite et contribuere (talk) 22:27, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Historic hotels of Portugal to Category:Heritage hotels

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge single-article category. Not helpful for navigation. The name is also unclear. Mclay1 (talk) 03:19, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:05, 17 February 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.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge/delete. (non-admin closure) GoldRomean (talk) 02:28, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

• Propose merging Category:Defunct manufacturing companies of Austria-Hungary (0) to Category:Manufacturing companies of Austria-Hungary
• Propose deleting Category:Defunct companies of Austria-Hungary (0)

Nominator's rationale: At least three out of four of these companies went defunct after Austria-Hungary ceased to exist, and they are all already categorised within Category:Defunct companies of Austria or Category:Defunct companies of Hungary. Since Austria-Hungary no longer exists, it doesn't seem relevant whether its former companies do or do not still exist in other countries. Mclay1 (talk) 00:48, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

• Merge and delete per nom.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:21, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:07, 17 February 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.