Wikiwand AI

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 May 26

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< May 25
May 27 >

May 26

Category:People from Hubbardston, Michigan

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:People from Clinton County, Michigan. Also merged to Category:People from Ionia County, Michigan per Namiba's comment. (non-admin closure) I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 04:57, 14 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge Category:People from Hubbardston, Michigan to Category:People from Clinton County, Michigan
  • Nominator's rationale This category only has 3 people. This is too narrow to justify a category in most cases, and merging to the parent category will make finding the articles from similar articles much easier.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:11, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. There is no Category:Hubbardston, Michigan either. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:50, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • merge per nom --Lenticel (talk) 03:00, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge also to Category:People from Ionia County, Michigan per the Hubbardston, Michigan article.--User:Namiba 13:18, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
  • First also listify in the town article. I have done this now. IMHO this should be standard practice, and a nominator should be expected to do this before making a merge nomination for a "People from" category. – Fayenatic London 22:36, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
    • No I do not think we should impose such a rule. This would lead to people being encoraged to dump contents from a category into an article without having a source to support the dumping. Article contents need to be supported by sources, much of the content of categories is not so supported. We need to avoid rules that encourage people to put unsourced material in an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:38, 12 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:University of Toronto stubs

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) 18:56, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated and unproposed; upmerge template to Category:Canada university stubs. Her Pegship (?) 18:05, 26 May 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:Military units and formations of Latvian Riflemen

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) 18:56, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. redundant category layer SMasonGarrison 17:41, 26 May 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:Cebuano dialects

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: dual merge. (non-admin closure) Staraction (talk · contribs) 11:59, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Only contains Boholano dialect, not useful for navigation. – Fayenatic London 09:33, 26 May 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:Telugu dialects

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: dual merge. (non-admin closure) Staraction (talk · contribs) 11:59, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Only contains Telangana dialect, not useful for navigation. – Fayenatic London 09:30, 26 May 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:Hindko language

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) 12:00, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: This pair of categories only contain two articles, Hindko and Awankari dialect, and are not useful for navigation. – Fayenatic London 09:25, 26 May 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:Charities based in Bosnia and Herzegovina

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) 00:06, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. LibStar (talk) 03:27, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
Comment Some targets are WP:ENGVAR redirects. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:46, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom. I changed 'organizations' to 'organisations' in the nom when applicable. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:07, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge 1 article categories hinder navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:50, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • merge per nom --Lenticel (talk) 12:53, 27 May 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.

Establishments and disestablishments in Wyoming

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 July 14#Establishments and disestablishments in Wyoming

Category:1925 establishments in Cyprus

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:18, 14 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Nominator's rationale There is 1 article here. This is too narrow to aid navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:54, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge per nom, this is not helpful for navigation. But only if all earlier years are going to be nominated too, for consistency. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:20, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Merge for Now per WP:NARROWCAT with no objection to future recreation should the article count grows. Open to further noms per MC but not making my support here contingent on that. - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:29, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • I would only support this if it's is relisted adding all siblings from 1646 up to 1925 within Category:Establishments in Cyprus by year. It's grossly inefficient to have a CFD for a single establishments category. – Fayenatic London 10:25, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
    You're not wrong, and that's definitely a broader CFD challenge with atomized nominations instead of small group ones. RevelationDirect (talk) 10:54, 31 May 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:1925 establishments in Idaho

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. (non-admin closure) Staraction (talk · contribs) 02:45, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Nominator's rationale each of these categories has only 1 or 2 articles. These are too narrow of categories to be helpful for navigation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:35, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose for consistency, these are just incidentally underpopulated while the trees as a whole are fine. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:22, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose, no benefit of making gaps in such yearly cat lists. Plus, they can be expanded (I just added three articles to the Wyoming cat), which is a better way to deal with these than deletion. Fram (talk) 09:14, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose When there's an off year, I think this is fine. (And thanks to Fram for populating one of them.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:44, 26 May 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:1951 establishments in Maine

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. (non-admin closure) Staraction (talk · contribs) 02:45, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Nominator's rationale with only 2 articles this is too narrow a?category to aid navigation. Merging to the parent categories will make it easier to navigate to other caregories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:23, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose for consistency, this is just incidentally underpopulated while the tree as a whole is fine. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:23, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above and because most of these can be further populated, which is better than these attempted deletions. I e.g. just added another article to this category. Fram (talk) 09:23, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose When there's an off year, I think this is fine. And thanks to Fram for helping to populate it. - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:44, 26 May 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:19th-century Neapolitan people

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:43, 16 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Nominator's rationale The Neapolitan people by century scheme is for people from the Kingdom of Naples, not the city of Naples. The Kingdom included all of thd Italian mainland south of the Papal States. It stretched far beyond Naples the city. We do not use demonyms for people from cities, just Nations. We also almost never split people from cities by century. We faced similar issues with the Venetian categories which is why the were renamed to 18th-century people from the Republic of Venice, etc. In this case more relevant there is not a Category:20th-century people from the Russian Empire. The Russian Empire ended in 1917, the Kingdom of Naples in 1816 so it does not make sense We have a category for the one that existed less time. I came across this category on the article on Luigi Pesce who was not even born until 1828. He is no more from the Kingdom of Naples than someone born in 1929 could be more the Russian Empire. We generally do not put people in categories as from counties that ceased to exist even when they were small children. A person born in Moscow in 1985 does not belong in Category:Soviet people, but this is like putting a person born in Moscow in 2002 in such a category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:06, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Support in principle, for more clarity. But then the earlier centuries should be renamed as well, for consistency. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:28, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose, This needs a different restructure. All people from the city of Naples should be moved to category:people from Naples by century. When the city was part of the Kingdom of Naples for a whole century, the city cat should be a subcat of the Kingdom cat, and all people from the kingdom (but not from the city) should be in the Kingdom/century cat. When Naples wasn't in the kingdom for all of the century, people should be added to the Kingdom/century cat as well where applicable. There are more than enough notable people from the city of Naples to have a full by century cat. Fram (talk) 09:28, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Object To switching the scope to people from the city. This category was created as people from the Kingdom of Naples. We do not do people from city by century. It is a horrible idea. I oppose it totally and completely. It is the worst idea possible.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:53, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Practically, Fram is merely suggesting creating new subcategories. That can be done irrespective of the proposed rename. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:10, 26 May 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:18th-century Neapolitan people

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:41, 16 July 2026 (UTC)
  • Nominator's rationale This name is not clear if they are from the City of Naples or the Kingdom of Naples. While anyone from the city in the 18th-century is from the Kingdom I think we would be better of in making the scope clear.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:47, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Support in principle, for more clarity. But then the earlier centuries should be renamed as well, for consistency. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:29, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose per my reasonning above. Should be split (city/others) with the city cat a subcat of the Kingdom cat. Fram (talk) 09:29, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment I think the split of people from the city out is the worst idea possible. It is a horrible idea. We do not split people by city by century and we should not start. People move around much too much for this to make sense. Splitting people by city and splitting people by country by century is enough. We do not need to add another layer of splitting people. Beyond this these were built as people by country categories and we should not just backhandedly repurpose them because we chose a very poor name for the categories. I do not think we should even consider creating people by city by century categories unless we can get a large number of editors in support of it. It is a very bad idea.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:56, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
    I get that you don't like the idea, and it is indeed not done yet at first glance (which I wasn't aware of). But the argument that "people move around much too much" doesn't really make sense: if you can group them as "people from city X", then at most these same people would be in 2 century cats "people from city X in century A" and "people from city X in century A+1". The "moving around too much" seems like a red herring as we already often categorise people by city anyway. Fram (talk) 20:10, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Practically, Fram is merely suggesting creating new subcategories. That can be done irrespective of the proposed rename. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:12, 26 May 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:1951 establishments in Weifang

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:1951 establishments in China. (non-admin closure) Staraction (talk · contribs) 01:33, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's rationale: Isolated category, upmerge for now SMasonGarrison 00:02, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
Upmerge all subcategories to Category:20th century in Weifang, each of which has one event per decade for four decades. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:32, 26 May 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.

Centuries in religions

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 June 8#Centuries in religions

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks