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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:21, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT ★Trekker (talk) 21:20, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Small_with_no_potential_for_growth: "Avoid categories that, by their very definition, will never have more than a few members, unless such categories are part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme". The rational clearly has exceptions which you keep ignoring. Dimadick (talk) 21:24, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Dimadick: you are repeatedly ignoring consensus and refusing to listen to anyone else who has been explaining this to you over and over again. If you keep creating these SMALLCATS and fictional cruft I will be bringing this to ANI.★Trekker (talk) 21:31, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SMALLCAT, the category might have been useful with say 10 children, but with two only the articles can easily be interlinked directly. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Just N. (talk) 16:46, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are only two entries and they are already linked to each other and to their father numerous times. Overcategorization. DrKay (talk) 17:42, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete small category with no potential to grow.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:21, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT ★Trekker (talk) 21:20, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Small_with_no_potential_for_growth: "Avoid categories that, by their very definition, will never have more than a few members, unless such categories are part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme". The rational clearly has exceptions which you keep ignoring. Dimadick (talk) 21:24, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SMALLCAT, the category might have been useful with say 10 children, but with two only the articles can easily be interlinked directly. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Just N. (talk) 16:46, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the articles are categorized enough in other ways, and are easily linked to the parent article in other ways, nothing is gained by this category, except category clutter.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:07, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:21, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT ★Trekker (talk) 21:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Small_with_no_potential_for_growth: "Avoid categories that, by their very definition, will never have more than a few members, unless such categories are part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme". The rational clearly has exceptions which you keep ignoring. Dimadick (talk) 21:24, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SMALLCAT, the category might have been useful with say 10 children, but with two only the articles can easily be interlinked directly. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:40, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose He had various well-known children. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:02, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are only two entries and they and the father are all linked on each other's articles already. Not a useful category. DrKay (talk) 08:53, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:21, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT ★Trekker (talk) 21:17, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Small_with_no_potential_for_growth: "Avoid categories that, by their very definition, will never have more than a few members, unless such categories are part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme". The rational clearly has exceptions which you keep ignoring. Dimadick (talk) 21:22, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SMALLCAT, the category might have been useful with say 10 children, but with two only the articles can easily be interlinked directly. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Just N. (talk) 16:49, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete neither person in the category is undercategorized, there are better ways to find this information than a category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:08, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are only two entries and they are already linked to each other and to their father numerous times. Overcategorization. DrKay (talk) 20:17, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:not merged. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:32, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "location" is about countries and states, whose articles should be split by continent (or for states - country). Instead purge the continental items from "location" into the subject. The target is too large and needs splitting, if anything. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:25, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peterkingiron. --Just N. (talk) 16:50, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:merge. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:29, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to 2nd level administrative division, except cities and larger towns, in this case except Ierapetra (16,000 people), Agios Nikolaos, Crete (13,000 people) and Sitia (10,000 people). This is follow-up on this earlier nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge for Now with no objection to recreating later if any category can grow to 5+ direct articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:14, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge for Now. --Just N. (talk) 16:51, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:merge. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:29, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, this concerns categorization by 3rd and 4th level administrative divisions of Greece, leading to a endless series of single-article or 2-article categories. The proposal is to merge to island level. This is follow-up on this earlier nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:22, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge for Now with no objection to recreating later if any category can grow to 5+ direct articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:14, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge for Now. --Just N. (talk) 16:51, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Merge This hollow layer does not aid navigation. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:15, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. --Just N. (talk) 16:53, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:23, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Morgan le Fay is a fictional character. Per the same reasoning as why Category:Children of Uther Pendragon was deleted so should this. ★Trekker (talk) 16:07, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Dimadick: how many times does it need to be explained to you that that is not an acceptable reasoning? You created this category in 2021 despite many times over being told that stuff like this is not ok. This is honestly starting to look disruptive to me.★Trekker (talk) 21:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Looked at the first entry, from which I quote: "in this story, he is said to be the child of Morgan le Fay and Julius Caesar." Yet, somehow he is not categorized in Category:Children of Julius Caesar. There's a reason for that: he's not a child of Julius Caesar. He's a fictional character. Fictional characters should not be categorized like this. Put them in Category:King Arthur's family or Category:Arthurian characters. DrKay (talk) 16:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SMALLCAT, the category might have been useful with say 10 children, but with three only the articles can easily be interlinked directly. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:53, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment And where do you see them interlinked? Dimadick (talk) 21:17, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not currently yet, but in this case it is more useful to create direct links instead of a category. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Just N. (talk) 16:54, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 2 of the 3 articles are essentially the same character, and only one of those mentions the link to Morgan le Fay. The other character is only rarely linked to Morgan le Fay. In a case like Morgan/Morgana there are way too many competing depictions of her for a category like this to make sense at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:11, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Would this help with SEO? JsfasdF252 (talk) 14:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Apparently this one has been withdrawn by nominator. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:26, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Murdered royalty of Macedonia (ancient kingdom)[edit]
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:not renamed. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:26, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: As per the previous nomination this should be Macedon, not the modern Macedonia. Looks like a bunch of incorrect speedy renames about 5 years ago. Pipsally (talk) 14:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Ancient Macedonia is also called "Macedonia" in English, not just "Macedon". It doesn't imply a closer relation to modern Macedonia. --Antondimak (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Dimadick. --Just N. (talk) 16:55, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural oppose I am unsure which name would be best, however we should match category names to articles names unless there is a super compelling reason not to, which there is not here. Article discussions tend to have the potential to draw more people with subject specific insights, which is what is needed here, and so a rename discussion should be had there. If it prevails we can consider a rename discussion here.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Executed royalty of Macedonia (ancient kingdom)[edit]
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:not renamed. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The ancient kingdom was Macedon, not Macedonia, which is the modern state in the same area. Pipsally (talk) 14:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural oppose for my reason mentioned above. I suspect that Macedonia (ancient kingdom) will prevail there, but I have only very limited expertise in the subject (I only took one graduate course of the history of ancient Greece, and have read little in the subject), so I am not sure, but If I had to rule now I would oppose, but it might go differently on a page discussion.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:14, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: There are 14 (Anglican) Archbishops in the Church of Nigeria, one of whom has the title 'Primate of All Nigeria'. The present title is ambiguous and the category is collecting Archbishops who are in Nigeria (but not 'of'). There are also 9 Catholic Archbishops in Nigeria, not to mention Maronite Catholic Eparchy of the Annunciation, with an exarch. (Eg Musa Filibus is an Archbishop of the Lutheran Church of Christ in Nigeria.) There have been 4 Primates of All Nigeria so far. Oculi (talk) 13:12, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is already Category:Anglican archbishops in Nigeria. No-one has the title 'Primate of the Anglican Church of Ireland'. Also the Church of Nigeria uses 'Province', not archdiocese. Oculi (talk) 15:11, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the website of the Church of Nigeria, the styles and titles are quite confused. Primate is used, as is Metropolitan and Archbishop. Both Province and Diocese seem to be in use. There seems to have been a recent reorganisation there. For categorical purposes, if they mean the same thing as in other parts of the Anglican Communion, is the local nomenclature significant? Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:58, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are 14 provinces, each with an Archbishop. Each province is divided into dioceses, each diocese with a bishop. One of the bishops is Archbishop of his province, one of the Archbishops is 'Primate of All Nigeria'. See eg [[1]]; Henry Chukwudum Ndukuba appears to be Bishop of Gombe, Archbishop of Jos and 'Primate of All Nigeria'. Or, judging from the article Henry Chukwudum Ndukuba, it may be that the Primate steps down as Archbishop and becomes 'Bishop of Abuja'. Oculi (talk) 16:32, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Perfectly OK. Oculi (talk) 16:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt-2, consistent with how these primates are referred to in the articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:32, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt2Category:Primates of the Church of Nigeria (with individuals as members) -- Ireland is not a good comparator, because the Ch of Ireland archbishops are few. According to Church of Nigeria there are 12 archbishops (over provinces), of whom one is primate, with 161 diocesan bishops under them. We would also need Category:Archbishops of the Church of Nigeria (or such like), which should probably be a container for categories for each title. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:35, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Anglican archbishops by diocese in Ireland[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: In Protestantism in Ireland, only the Church of Ireland has archbishops. So the adjective "Anglican" is redundant and the denomination " Church of Ireland" more precise. Also they are archdioceses, not dioceses. Follows recent CFD in the Roman Catholic Church for archbishops. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support "province", per common language within the denomination and consistent within the category tree. I am neutral between "Anglican" and "Church of Ireland". Marcocapelle (talk) 20:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Rename -- Category:Church of Ireland archbishops by diocese. In the Anglican church, each archhbishop has a diocese as well as being head over a province. The Anglican church does not use the term archdiocese. "In Ireland" is also redundant, because ChofI does not operate elsewhere. The see of Armagh always carries the same titles of archbishop and primate. The church of Wales may be different in that Llandaff may not always be the primate. Strictly, before the disestablishment of the the Church of Ireland in the 19th century, Anglican would be correct, but I think we might usefully apply the precedent uses for alumni, where the alumni of a merged or renamed college are deemed to have attended the successor. On this principle, we would not need to split the succession at the point of disestablishment; instead the category would have a headnote to the effect that the category includes Anglican bishops from the Reformation until disestablishment and pre-Reformation Catholic bishops. There is a continuous succession in both cases, save perhaps for a Cromwellian break. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:49, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:delete. Fences&Windows 18:59, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: While it is true that every article in this category mentions a speeding conviction, I think this characteristic is common enough to be essentially trivial. It certainly is not defining for those so categorized. And the same category was deleted before, in 2018. Good Ol’factory(talk) 01:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per G4. This is so common and trivial that it isn't worth noting at all. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:36, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Recipients of the Saxe-Ernestine House Order[edit]
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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:24, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Background In the past, we've deleted dozens of similar categories for high ranking visitors and those nominations are listed right here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:05, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this over categorization by award has become absurd.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Recipients of the Order of Francisco de Miranda[edit]
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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:24, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete one of the people in this category is in about 20 award categories, this is absurd.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:16, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
