Wikiwand AI

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 June 30

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< June 29
July 1 >

June 30

Category:Fictional Special Boat Service personnel

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 03:25, 8 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. underpopulated cateogry SMasonGarrison 22:48, 30 June 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.

Publications by ideology

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 as nominated. I'll also list this at WP:CFDWM for re-parenting. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 13:43, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Ok, this is sort of my 2nd attempt. I am going to start small, but see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2026_May_9#Category:Publications for context about the immense issues with the word "publication".

In short, "publication" has many divergent meanings, we are using it incoherently and in different categories with different definitions. Almost everything in the subcategories of this case is using it to mean periodicals. Several of the subcategories are already titled periodicals, e.g. Category:Anarchist periodicals. Changing the title to periodicals makes that intention clear and lessens the inconsistency. Also, if we're using this to not mean periodicals (but we are looking at the contents of the categories, this is redundant to the Category:Mass media by ideology categories and Category:Works by ideology (where individual things like books go).

Regarding other potential concerns we have a whole Category:Categories by ideology tree and we have "[x] works" versions of almost all the categories above so deal with it there if that is your gripe. The issue here is periodicals vs publications. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:17, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

  • Rename and re-parent per nom. The term Periodicals covers the content more precisely. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:12, 1 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Query PARAKANYAA, could you, in one average-size sentence, explain the difference you see between publication and periodical? I've read Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 May 9#Category:Publications, but I found that more confusing. You see it as very important but you are talking around the central point of this nomination without naming it. I apologize in advance if you find this request frustrating but you seem to care so much here and I'm not still not sure what the difference is. Liz Read! Talk! 03:52, 3 July 2026 (UTC)
    @Liz I didn't want to copy paste my long explanation here. A periodical is written media that is published in intervals, like a magazine or a newspaper, or a newsletter or bulletin or academic journal, etc. A publication as used for our category system is either 1) anything that has ever been published, but not serially, including books, maps, video games, etc (in which case it is identical in scope with mass media and works trees, which are separate and should be deleted for being duplicative) 2) the act of publishing something, which none of these categories are about or 3) print media that is published in intervals, excluding one-off publications like books. We are totally inconsistent about it and duplicating identical scopes across several trees. The categories in this nom are all about written media published in intervals (my last nom was too unfocused). "Publication" as a term is extremely vague and for half of our categories we are using it to mean "mass media"/"works"/all media (despite having a separate tree for mass media and works) and half we are using it to mean periodicals. I think we should move the ones where we mean periodicals, serial literature, to use "periodicals" because periodical literature has different categorizations consideration than say, a book, and are discussed in a distinct way. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:19, 3 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Support, as "publications" technically includes books. Dahn (talk) 11:14, 3 July 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:Icelandic-language feminine surnames

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 July 8#Category:Icelandic-language feminine surnames

Category:Sinhalese surnames of Swiss origin

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 21:13, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry, and also not Sinhalese, just Swiss, e.g. Olivier Schaffter. PARAKANYAA (talk) 16:32, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:11, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete I do not think this is defining to the surname. If we had a family article it would be different.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:47, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Οἶδα (talk) 20:30, 30 June 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:6th-century religious buildings and structures by country

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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:32, 8 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layer, upmerge for now. SMasonGarrison 15:58, 30 June 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:Swiss-language surnames

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 21:14, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: There is no "Swiss language". Entries in this category could easily fit in the subcategory Category:Surnames of Swiss origin. Qualiesin (talk) 14:53, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
Delete... there is obviously no Swiss language. PARAKANYAA (talk) 16:26, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
Delete - Category:Surnames of Swiss origin is almost certainly the intended category that was supposed to be created (either that or something like Romansh-language surnames?) LincolnMagnus (talk) 21:12, 30 June 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:Classification templates

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: soft rename due to lack of participation in the discussion. The nomination was unopposed. (non-admin closure) Staraction (talk · contribs) 21:14, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Disambiguation, following the respective supporting pages Wikipedia:Content assessment and WP:Category classification templates. – Fayenatic London 09:58, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 12:10, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 14:08, 30 June 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:Government agencies by region

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 14:38, 2 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Propose renaming Category:Government agencies by region to Category:Government agencies by location
Nominator's rationale: The contents of this category aren't regions (city, continent, country). Therefore we should rename this to reflect the contents SMasonGarrison 17:32, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 14:08, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
I'm fine with either. SMasonGarrison 17:29, 30 June 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.

Republic of Genoa

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 the Europe categories. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 13:44, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, mostly isolated one- or two-articles categories, this is not helpful for navigation. I can imagine that there will be objections to the targets because the modern country of Italy was only established in 1860. However, discussions in order to have that changed did not lead to consensus so far. Meanwhile this nomination takes for granted that these years in Italy categories simply exist, without prejudice to discuss them again any other time. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:15, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge to Europe not Italy. I do not think Italy as a geographical concept is clear enough to use in these years. What is the scope of Italy as a location before unification? Do we include things happening in South Tyrol because it is now in Italy, even though that happens decades after reunification and thus treat the post-World War I (or maybe World War II) border of Italy as a thing that defines Italy for all time? Is it the "Italian peninsula" in which case we exclude thing happening in Sicily, Sardinia and I guess Corsica, which might actually exclude some of these contents. Do we include everything happening in the Republic of Venice, or just what happened in the part of that Republic now in Italy. How about things happening in the Savoyard State in the parts of the state that are now in France? Which is probably the trickiest because the Savoyard State is the entity that drives the unification of Italy. We can determine who is and is not Italian in 1780 with at least some idea, but determining where is and is not Italy in 1780 is much harder. Especially since the Papal States in the year also include Avignon. So in 1780 do we include Avignon, Savoy, the region of Nice, the entire Republic of Venice in Italy, if so why? on what principal? Any decision we make I do not think is justified. For event by year and establishment by year categories I think we should either categoriez by special Republic/Kingdom/Grand Duchy etc. or just use the general Europe category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:10, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge These are too narrow. The target Italy by year cats exist as current parents so we should use them until such time as they are nominated. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:49, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus to merge, but to Europe or to Italy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Staraction (talk · contribs) 14:08, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
Half Merge- Put the "individual year Republic of Genoa" into the broader "century Republic of Genoa" category. However don't put it into the Italy ones for now, as the Republic of Genoa is a distinct entity.
Given that Italy didn't exist yet, the best course might be something like "Year on Italian Peninsula" , or "Year in Italy (geographic concept)" if we want to bring the Italian city-states into a single category, but that's probably outside the scope of this discussion LincolnMagnus (talk) 21:22, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment I think we should not merge incorrectly. There is no coherent country of Italy, we should not merge into unclear categories and merge to ones that are clear.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:50, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Well, if not merged to Years in Italy, then merge to Years in Europe. At the very least one can argue here that Genoa is geographically not on the Italian Peninsula. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:18, 1 July 2026 (UTC)
        • I support the merge to years in Europe. Genoa is not on the Italian peninsula, so there is a coherent way to define Italy that does not include Genoa.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:22, 1 July 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:Fictional doves and pigeons

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 13:34, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Nominator's rationale Once I removed the stuff in the sub category (which is books not fictional characters) and once I removed all the TV shows, stories, novels, etc. that were not actually fictional doves and pigeons, we are left with 2 actual articles (one of which is Doves as symbols) and a few redirects. Notice it is doves as symbols. In fiction the fact that doves and pigeons have a similar taxonomic classification is largely ignored and they have very different roles. We need to stop sorting fictional characters by taxonomic classification, and anyway this category is too small to be useful for navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:16, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom, WP:NARROWCAT even if we ignore the whole taxonomy part. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:33, 30 June 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:Maltese LGBTQ comedians

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: split. (non-admin closure) Staraction (talk · contribs) 13:34, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated category, upmerge for now. SMasonGarrison 13:14, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. —Biosketch (talk) 13:23, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:33, 30 June 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.

Ideological intersection categories

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. Participants generally did not agree on whether the category was defining or whether inclusion was an example of synthesis. (non-admin closure) Staraction (talk · contribs) 21:16, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

While their subject matter encompasses valid political history, these specific intersectional categories have become problematic hubs for WP:OR, WP:SYNTH, and a violation of WP:CATDEF.

Redundancy and Misclassification: Many entries in these categories are already well-served by existing, precise categories (e.g., Fascism, Third Position, Qutbism). Applying the vague label "Right-wing anti-capitalism" to these movements is often redundant. More importantly, it invites editors to categorize subjects based on an interpretation of their economic policies rather than how the subjects or secondary sources define themselves.

SYNTH: These categories act as "opinion buckets" that synthesize disparate subjects under a broad, non-defining label.

  • Examples in "Right-wing anti-capitalism": Including figures like George Fitzhugh (a pro-slavery agrarian theorist) or Richard M. Weaver (a traditionalist conservative) alongside movements like Golden Dawn under a single label forces a cohesive ideological link that is not supported by academic consensus. The category treats them as equivalent nodes in a single ideological network.
  • Examples in "Left-wing anti-communism": The inclusion of individuals like Martin Luther King Jr. or Desmond Tutu illustrates how the category acts as a catch-all for anyone on the left who happened to oppose a specific communist entity. This is an exercise in category-based synthesis that is not "defining" for these figures.

Violation of CATDEF: Membership in these categories is rarely a "defining characteristic." For most subjects, being "anti-capitalist" or "anti-communist" is a secondary political stance. Forcing these subjects into these labels encourages "category-warring" rather than encyclopedic classification.

Navigation and Maintenance: These labels are inherently subjective. What qualifies as "left-wing" or "right-wing" in the context of anti-communism or anti-capitalism is a subject of endless, unresolved debate. Wikipedia categories should be objective; they should not be used as a platform to define the political spectrum for the reader. —Biosketch (talk) 13:08, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete these categories clearly violate the rule against opinion categories. at times they may also violate the rule against not sorting things by what they are not.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:17, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
Oppose deletion. These categories seems to be defining to me, but it is really hard to follow your argmument here. If not kept in some capacity, the contents should be merged, not deleted. SMasonGarrison 13:17, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
Keep per SMasongarrison. These are defining things; right-wing anti. They could be cleaned up for some, but this goes for tons of categories and there is plenty of stuff in it for which it is defining and notable. And no, Lambert, political spectrum categories do not violate the rule against opinion categories. PARAKANYAA (talk) 13:20, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • On the fence It's clear these categories demonstrate hallmarks of WP:SYNTH and WP:OR. For instance, calling Martin Luther King Jr. anti-communist is... certainly a questionable inclusion. Likewise calling The Decline of the West an anti-capitalist book seems something of a gross over-simplification. However I guess the problem for me is more the content of the categories than that they exist. I know AfD is not cleanup. I'm not quite sure where CfD stands on this. I suppose a clear interpretation of my !vote here would be that the categories need to be stripped of WP:SYNTH. Whether they should be retained will likely depend on how much is left when that work is done. Simonm223 (talk) 13:49, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
    I agree that the contents aren't perfect, but I think there is a clear topic here. Unless it is unfixable we do not delete categories for being a bit of a mess. Like for example I think 99% of the contents of the "white nationalism" category tree do not mention "white nationalism" whatsoever (due almost entirely to one indeffed editor), which I have been trying to clean up; it would honestly be easier to just delete all of them and start over but if I tried to do that I predict people would be rather angry. This is far from that, I think it's fixable. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:32, 30 June 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:Fictional flightless birds

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 13:34, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Nominator's rationale I would argue this category is grouping things by a common trait that ignores the way people really think of things. Ostriches, Emus, Rheas and fictional birds that are vaguely like them, are one group, technically the dodo is a totally different type of bird, and then the penguin is another totally different type of bird. And this is before we delve into whether the controlling fact is if the birds can fly in reality, or if a fictional bird that in the word does not fly but is a fictionalized version of a bird that can fly belongs here. I think we can just merge this up to fictional birds and sort by the specific type of bird when we have enough cases of notable characters in fiction being that bird.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:50, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge You make a good point that such birds may not necessarily be "flightless" in the realm of fiction and fantasy. One example is that there are rare examples of flying chocobos in the Final Fantasy games. In the real world, it can be assured that flightless birds are flightless. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:15, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge I remember a commercial about a virtual reality headset where an ostrich learns to fly while using one. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:57, 1 July 2026 (UTC)
  • merge per nom --Lenticel (talk) 23:25, 5 July 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:20th-century executions by Dominica

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 13:33, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Nominator's rationale the article on Frederick Newton states he is the only person who has been executed by Dominica at all. So we do not need to split Executions by Dominica up in 2 different categories when there is only 1 possible article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:33, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:40, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. If there's literally only one its kind of ridiculous to have the seperate categories LincolnMagnus (talk) 21:24, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge Dominica still has the death penalty, but there is only one person in the entire category tree. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:02, 1 July 2026 (UTC)
    • The article says this is the only person Dominica has executed. Predicting the future is outside the role of Wikipedia. Keep in mind being executed by itself does not make someone notable. One of these categories cannot grow, since it is time limited to a time in the past.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:24, 1 July 2026 (UTC)
      I never contradicted that. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:43, 1 July 2026 (UTC)
  • merge per nom --Lenticel (talk) 23:26, 5 July 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:Fictional characters with giftedness

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 12:15, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Propose renaming Category:Fictional characters with giftedness to Category:Fictional geniuses
Nominator's rationale: Clearer and more precise name. "Giftedness" can refer to any sort of skill, not just the intellectual sort. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:00, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
Comment: Giftedness is supposed to capture a variety of extraordinary intellectual abilities. Do we want to narrow the category to more the more classic archetype?SMasonGarrison 13:18, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
The thing about giftedness is that it's rarely a defining trait in real life, at least. It may mark someone as interesting or likely to excel, but people largely recognize more drastic forms of extreme intellect. I think fiction is the same way. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:38, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete I think this is too subjective to be useable as a category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:02, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete per G4. A page at the target title was deleted twice at CfD in 2007, and possibly more recently at other titles. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:19, 1 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-defining. The scope of this broad category is debatable. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 00:20, 1 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-defining per above --Lenticel (talk) 23:26, 5 July 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.

Colony of Santiago

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 12:15, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: merge, overly complicated category tree for only five articles in total. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:55, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
Merge per nom. LincolnMagnus (talk) 21:25, 30 June 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:Fictional genocide survivors

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 July 8#Category:Fictional genocide survivors

Category:Fictional survivors

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). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:21, 8 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Overly vague category that goes into WP:SUBJECTIVECAT as to what is considered a "survivor". Is it someone tough? Someone who survived a direct attack? Someone who is good at surviving in disasters? It is impossible to say. I do think Category:Fictional sole survivors is more defining and can be merged into Category:Fictional characters. Category:Fictional genocide survivors is more dubious and was made by a blocked user. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:21, 30 June 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:Fictional protagonist death in television

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 12:14, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Not clear if this is defining. If people think it is, it should be renamed to "Deceased fictional television characters". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:13, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. Οἶδα (talk) 16:22, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge It is unclear what exactly this is, but it looks like a failed attempt to diffuse the target category by medium. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:21, 1 July 2026 (UTC)
  • merge per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:36, 6 July 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:Fictional characters who are unlucky

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 12:13, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. Any character that has had a tragic event happen to them may be considered "unlucky". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:08, 30 June 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:Fictional white nationalists

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 12:14, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Not one of the characters in this subcategory are described as, and especially not defined as being, a white nationalist in their articles (white nationalism is a distinct subcategory of white supremacy and is not synonymous, we have different category trees, none of these people are our definition of white nationalist). None of these articles even mention white nationalism. Except Turner, maybe, but that's a redirect, and he can go in the neo-Nazi subcategory, which is defining. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:31, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
Weak delete- There almost certainly are examples of fictional characters who are white nationalists, so the category may eventually be useful. However most of the examples currently present do not fit properly fit at @PARAKANYAA said. LincolnMagnus (talk) 21:32, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
There are neo-Nazis but I honestly can't think of any who are white nationalists. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:45, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
Also most fictional characters are not notable enough to have articles. So the fact that some trait exists for some fictional characters somewhere is a different issue from whether there are enough such characters who are notable for us to create a category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:26, 1 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete since none of the characters here fit the category name.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:06, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
  • delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 07:23, 6 July 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.

20th century in Chongqing

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 12:13, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: merge, per WP:OCYEAR, mostly isolated one- or two-articles categories, this is not helpful for navigation. With two exceptions (1985 and one article in 1990s) they are all establishments, even if they are currently not yet in an establishments category. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:32, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
Support. Thanks for cleaning up this underpopulated category tree. SMasonGarrison 13:19, 30 June 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:Warner templates

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). Staraction (talk · contribs) 12:13, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to the parent company category because this is just blatant overcategorization, and "Warner" is just informal. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 01:58, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
Merge as an unnecessary category layer. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:22, 1 July 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.

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks