Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/User

"WP:CFC" and "WP:CFD" redirect here. For categories for creation, see WP:Articles for creation/Categories. For criteria for deletion, see WP:Criteria for deletion.

XFD backlog

V	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Total
CfD	0	0	11	64	75
TfD	0	0	0	2	2
MfD	0	0	0	4	4
FfD	0	0	0	2	2
RfD	0	0	5	26	31
AfD	0	0	0	3	3

Categories for discussion (CfD) is the central venue for discussing specific proposals to delete, merge, rename or split categories and stub types in accordance with the guidelines for categorization, category naming and stub articles.

For detailed instructions about using CfD, see "How to use CfD" below. Briefly, nominations are handled through one of two processes:

1. Speedy renaming and merging, for uncontroversial proposals that meet specified criteria—see "Speedy renaming and merging" below.
2. Full discussion, for all other proposals. Discussions typically remain open for at least seven days and are closed once a rough consensus has formed or no objections to the nomination are raised.

Except in uncontroversial cases such as reverting vandalism, do not amend or depopulate a category once it has been nominated at CfD as this hampers other editors' efforts to evaluate a category and participate in the discussion.

When a category is renamed or merged with another category, in limited circumstances it may be helpful to leave an instance of the {{Category redirect|...}} template on the category's former page. See "Redirecting categories" below for more information.

Wikipedia:Move review can be used to contest the outcome of a CfD request that is limited in scope to renaming, as long as all steps are followed. If a discussion on the request closer's talk page does not resolve an issue, then a move review will evaluate the close of a CfD move discussion to determine whether or not the close was reasonable and consistent with the spirit and intent of common practice, policies, and guidelines. CfDs involving deletion should be reviewed at Wikipedia:Deletion review.

Scope

CfD is intended only for specific proposals to delete, merge, rename or split categories or stub types. For general discussion about how to improve the category system, use other appropriate venues such as Wikipedia talk:Categorization, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories, and any relevant WikiProjects' talk pages.

Current discussions

Add a new entry

• All current discussions
  • 25 May (Saturday)
  • 24 May (Friday)
  • 23 May (Thursday)
  • 22 May (Wednesday)
  • 21 May (Tuesday)
  • 20 May (Monday)
  • 19 May (Sunday)
  • 18 May (Saturday)
  • Previous 8 to 21 days
• Speedy renaming requests
• Archive and indices

Discussions awaiting closure

• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 17 (36 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 16 (13 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 15 (4 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 14 (3 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 13 (3 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 12 (2 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 4 (2 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 1 (1 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 30 (2 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 29 (1 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 27 (3 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 23 (3 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 22 (1 open)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 21 (1 open)

See also the list of individual discussions awaiting closure here and the list of full open discussions awaiting closure here.

How to use CfD

Nomination procedure

Twinkle

You may use Twinkle to facilitate CfD nominations. To install Twinkle, go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets and check "Twinkle" in the "Browsing" section. Use the now-installed "XfD" (Start a deletion discussion) tab while viewing the page you want to nominate.

Twinkle only allows you to nominate a single category or stub template. For bundled nominations including multiple categories, see § MassCFD.

MassCFD

You can use the script User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/massCFD to automatically make mass nominations.

Manual nominations

I	Preliminary steps. Before nominating a category: Read and understand the guidance for category names and overcategorization. For categories containing biographical articles, read the guidance for categorization of people. For categories containing the user pages of Wikipedians, read the guidance for user categories. In the following special cases: If a category is a red link, then it is already deleted (or was never created in the first place) and does not need to be nominated. If a category is unpopulated, use {{db-catempty}} to request it be speedily deleted in 7 days. If a category is populated solely by a template (other than a stub template, see #Stub types below) and you are proposing to delete both the category and template, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion. For further information, see Wikipedia:Categorization and Wikipedia:Manual of Style.
II	Edit the category. Add one of the following templates at the beginning of the category page (not the talk page) of every category to be discussed. For nominations involving large numbers of categories, help adding these templates can be requested here. Otherwise, if nominating a single category: For deleting, use {{subst:Cfd}} For merging, use {{subst:Cfm|Other category}} For merging to two categories, use {{subst:Cfm-double|Other category 1|Other category 2}} For renaming, use {{subst:Cfr|Proposed name}} For splitting, use {{subst:Cfs|Proposed name 1|Proposed name 2}} For converting the category into a list, use {{subst:Cfl|Proposed name}} For other options (containerization, etc.), use {{subst:Cfd|type=nature of proposed discussion}} (see Template:Cfd/doc#Optional parameter) If nominating a group of related categories, use a bundled nomination: For deleting, use {{subst:Cfd|CfD section name}} For merging, use {{subst:Cfm|Other category|CfD section name}} For merging to two categories, use {{subst:Cfm-double|Other category 1|Other category 2|CfD section name}} For renaming, use {{subst:Cfr|Proposed name|CfD section name}} For splitting, use {{subst:Cfs|Proposed name 1|Proposed name 2|CfD section name}} For converting the category into a list, {{subst:Cfl|Proposed name|CfD section name}} For other options (containerization, etc.), use {{subst:Cfd|type=nature of proposed discussion|CfD section name}} (see Template:Cfd/doc#Optional parameter) Include "CfD", "CfM", "CfR", "CfS" or "CfL" in the edit summary, and do not mark the edit as minor. Preview before saving. To add the template for previous nomination days, use the "full" version of the template by appending "full" to the template name, i.e. {{cfd full}}, {{cfm full}}, {{cfr full}}, {{cfs full}} and {{cfl full}}. Use the |day=, |month= and |year= parameters to make the banner link to the correct CfD page. Consider adding {{subst:cfd notice|Category name|2024 May 25|CfD section name}} ~~~~ to the talk page of the category's creator. For details about these templates, see each template's documentation.
III	Create the CFD section. Click THIS LINK to edit the section of CfD for today's entries. Follow the instructions (visible in edit mode) to copy and paste one of the templates below. When inserting category names into these template's parameters, except the text= parameter, omit the Category: prefix and do not use wikilinks, as the template takes care of this. If nominating a single category: For deleting, use {{subst:Cfd2|Obsolete category|text=Your reason(s) for the proposed deletion. ~~~~}} For merging, use {{subst:Cfm2|Origin category|Destination category|text=Your reason(s) for the proposed merge. ~~~~}} For merging to two categories, use {{subst:Cfm2|Origin category|Destination category 1|target2=Destination category 2|text=Your reason(s) for the proposed merge. ~~~~}} For renaming, use {{subst:Cfr2|Current category|Proposed name|text=Your reason(s) for the proposed rename. ~~~~}} For splitting, use {{subst:Cfs2|Current category|Proposed category 1|Proposed category 2|text=Your reason(s) for the proposed split. ~~~~}} For converting the category into a list, use {{subst:Cfc2|Current category|Proposed article|text=Your reason(s) for the proposed conversion. ~~~~}} For other options (containerization, etc.), use {{subst:Cfd2|Current category|type=other type|text=Your reason(s) for the proposed conversion. ~~~~}} For a bundled nomination, use one of the standard templates to build the "Cfd section name" for the first nominated category. After saving that, the second and subsequent nominations must be inserted manually, as follows: ==== Cfd section name ==== * 1st category * 2nd category [Make clear whether you propose deletion, merging or renaming] * Your reason for nominating the categories, and signature. If a bundled nomination is too long, consider using {{hidden}} to hide some of the nominated categories. In your reason, use links if mentioning articles or categories. To link to a category, use the colon trick by adding a colon (:) to the beginning of the link, e.g. [[:Category:Foo]]. Preview before saving to check that your nomination is formatted correctly, and remember to include your signature at the end of the nomination.

Stub types

I	Preliminary steps. In general, a stub type consists of a stub template and a dedicated stub category. Before nominating a stub type for deletion, merging or renaming: Read and understand guidance for creating stub types and stub type naming conventions. Review the list of existing stub types—be advised, this list may not be comprehensive. If you wish to: Create a new stub type—follow the procedure for proposing new stub types. Delete, merge or rename a stub category only, without deleting or renaming the associated stub template—follow the instructions above this section. Delete or rename a stub template—continue to section II.
II	Edit the template. Add one of the following tags at the beginning of the template to be discussed. For deletion, use {{subst:Sfd-t|Section name}} For renaming, use {{subst:Sfr-t|Proposed name|Section name}} Please include "SFD" or "SFR" in the edit summary, and don't mark the edit as minor. Preview before saving. Consider notifying the template's creator on their talk page. To find the contributor, check the page history of the stub template.
III	Create the CFD section. Click THIS LINK to edit the section of CfD for today's entries. Follow the instructions (visible in edit mode) and paste the following text (remember to update the default parameters): For deletion, use {{subst:sfd-t2|TemplateName|text=Your reason(s) for the proposed deletion. ~~~~}} For renaming, use {{subst:sfr-t2|TemplateOldName|TemplateNewName|text=Your reason(s) for the proposed deletion. ~~~~}} In your rationale, mention how many articles currently use the template to help other editors. When linking to a category in your rationale, always add a colon (:) to the beginning of the link, like [[:Category:Foo]]. This makes a category link that can be seen on the page, and avoids putting this page into the category you are nominating. Preview before saving to check that your nomination is formatted correctly, and remember to include your signature at the end of the nomination.

Notifying interested projects and editors

In addition to the steps listed above, you may choose to invite participation by editors who are likely to be informed about a nominated category. All such efforts must comply with Wikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing. In addition, to help make your messages about the CfD discussion clear, avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations, link to relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the discussion itself.

Notifying related WikiProjects

WikiProjects consist of groups of editors who are interested in a particular subject. If a nominated category is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, consider adding a brief, neutral note on their talk page(s) about the nomination. You may use {{subst:cfd notice|Category name|2024 May 25|CfD section name}} ~~~~ or write a personalized message.

Tagging the nominated category's talk page with a relevant WikiProject's banner will include the category in that WikiProject's Article Alerts if they subscribe to the system. For instance, tagging a nominated category with {{WikiProject Physics}} will add the discussion to Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.

Notifying substantial contributors to the category

While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and main contributors of the category that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, check the category's page history or talk page. You may use {{Cfd notice}} to inform the category's creator and all other editors.

Notifying other interested editors

It may be helpful to invite other subject-matter experts by posting a message on the talk page of the most closely related article, such as Protein family for Category:Protein families. You may use {{Cfdnotice}} for this.

Closing procedure

After seven days, someone will close the discussion according to the consensus that formed or, if needed, relist it to allow more discussion. Editors closing discussions must follow the administrator instructions and, except in the case of a "keep" or "no consensus" outcome, implement the result or log it at the Working page to ensure it is implemented.

Redirecting categories

"WP:CAT-R" redirects here. For the guideline on categorizing redirects, see Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects.

For an essay on this topic, see WP:Category redirects that should be kept.

In general, an unpopulated category should be deleted (see speedy deletion criterion C1) because it is not useful for navigation and sorting. In limited circumstances, and because categories cannot be redirected using "hard" redirects (i.e. #REDIRECT[[''target'']]), we use a form of "soft redirect" to solve the issue. You can create a category redirect by adding {{Category redirect|target}} to the category page. Bots patrol these categories and move articles into the "redirect" targets.

In particular, category redirects are used at the former category name when we convert hyphens into en dashes (e.g. Category:Canada-Russia relations → Category:Canada–Russia relations). It is also helpful to set up category redirects from titles with plain letters (i.e. characters on a standard keyboard) where the category names include diacritics.

A list of redirected categories is available at Category:Wikipedia soft redirected categories.

Speedy renaming and merging

Speedy renaming or speedy merging of categories may be requested only if they meet a speedy criterion, for example WP:C2D (consistency with main article's name) or WP:C2C (consistency with established category tree names). Please see instructions below.

1. Determine which speedy criterion applies
2. Tag category page with {{subst:cfr-speedy|New name}} or {{subst:cfm-speedy|Merge target}}
3. List request along with speedy criteria reason under "Current requests" below on this page

Please note that a speedy request must state which of the narrowly defined criteria strictly applies. Hence, any other non-speedy criteria, even "common sense" or "obvious", may be suitable points, but only at a full discussion at WP:Categories for discussion.

Request may take 48 hours to process after listing if there are no objections. This delay allows other users to review the request to ensure that it meets the speedy criteria for speedy renaming or merging, and to raise objections to the proposed change.

Categories that qualify for speedy deletion (per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, e.g., "patent nonsense", "recreation") can be tagged with the regular speedy tags, such as {{db|reason}} with no required delay. Empty categories can be deleted if they remain empty 7 days after tagging with {{db-empty}}. Renaming under C2E may also be processed instantly (at the discretion of an administrator) as it is a variation on G7.

To oppose a speedy request you must record your objection within 48 hours of the nomination. Do this by inserting immediately under the nomination:

• Oppose, (the reasons for your objection). ~~~~

You will not be able to do this by editing the page WP:Categories for discussion. Instead, you should edit the section WP:Categories for discussion#Add requests for speedy renaming and merging here or the page WP:Categories for discussion/Speedy#Add requests for speedy renaming and merging here (WP:CFDS). Be aware that in the course of any discussion, the nomination and its discussion may get moved further down the page purely for organizational convenience – you may need to search WP:CFDS to find the new location. Participate in any ongoing discussion, but unless you withdraw your opposition, a knowledgeable person may eventually bring forward the nomination and discussion to become a regular CFD discussion. At that stage you may add further comments, but your initial opposition will still be considered. However, if after seven days there has been no support for the request, and no response from the nominator, the request may be dropped from further consideration as a speedy.

Contested speedy requests become stale, and can be untagged and delisted after 7 days of inactivity. Optionally, if the discussion may be useful for future reference, it may be copied to the category talk page, with a section heading and {{moved discussion from|[[WP:CFDS]]|2=~~~~}}. If the nominator wants to revive the process, this may be requested at WP:Categories for discussion (CfD) in accordance with its instructions.

If you belatedly notice and want to oppose a speedy move that has already been processed, contact one of the admins who process the Speedy page. If your objection seems valid, they may reverse the move, or start a full CFD discussion.

Speedy criteria

The category-specific criteria for speedy renaming, or merging are strictly limited to:

C2A: Typographic and spelling fixes

• Correction of spelling errors and capitalization fixes. Differences between British and American spelling (e.g. Harbours → Harbors) are not considered errors; however if the convention of the relevant category tree is to use one form over the other then a rename may be appropriate under C2C. If both spellings exist as otherwise-identical category names, they should be merged.
• Appropriate conversion of hyphens into en dashes or vice versa (e.g. Category:Canada-Russia relations → Category:Canada–Russia relations).
• Correction of obvious grammatical errors, such as a missing conjunction (e.g. Individual frogs toads → Individual frogs and toads). This includes pluralizing a noun in the name of a set category, but not when disagreement might reasonably be anticipated as to whether the category is a topic or set category.

C2B: Consistency with established Wikipedia naming conventions and practices

• Expanding abbreviated country names (e.g. U.S. → United States).
• Disambiguation fixes from an unqualified name (e.g. Category:Washington → Category:Washington (state) or Category:Washington, D.C.).

C2C: Consistency with established category tree names

Bringing a category into line with established naming conventions for that category tree, or into line with the various "x by y", "x of y", or "x in y" categorization conventions specified at Wikipedia:Category names

• This should be used only where there is no room for doubt that the category in question is being used for the standard purpose instead of being a potential subcategory.
• This criterion should be applied only when there is no ambiguity or doubt over the existence of a category naming convention. Such a convention must be well defined and must be overwhelmingly used within the tree. If this is not the case then the category in question must be brought forward to a full Cfd nomination.
• This criterion will not apply in cases where the category tree observes distinctions in local usage (e.g. Category:Transportation in the United States and Category:Transport in the United Kingdom).

C2D: Consistency with main article's name

• Renaming a topic category to match its eponymous page (e.g. Category:The Beatles and The Beatles).
• This applies only if the related page's current name (and by extension, the proposed name for the category) is:
  • unambiguous (so it generally does not apply to proposals to remove a disambiguator from the category name, even when the main article is the primary topic of its name, i.e. it does not contain a disambiguator); and
  • uncontroversial, either because of longstanding stability at that particular name, or because the page was just moved (i) after a page move discussion resulted in explicit consensus to rename, or (ii) unilaterally to reflect an official renaming which is verified by one or more citations (provided in the nomination). C2D does not apply if the result would be contrary to guidelines at WP:CATNAME, or there is any ongoing discussion about the name of the page or category, or there has been a recent discussion concerning any of the pages that resulted in a no consensus result, or it is controversial in some other way.
• This criterion may also be used to rename a set category in the same circumstances, where the set is defined by a renamed topic; e.g. players for a sports team, or places in a district.
• Before nominating a category to be renamed per WP:C2D, consider whether it makes more sense to move the article instead of the category.

C2E: Author request

• This criterion applies only if the author of a category requests or agrees to renaming within six months of creating the category.
• The criterion does not apply if other editors have populated or changed the category since it was created. "Other editors" includes bots that populated the category, but excludes an editor working with the author on the renaming.

C2F: One eponymous page

• This criterion applies if the category contains only an eponymous article, list, template or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories, where applicable. Nominations should use {{subst:cfm-speedy}} (speedy merger) linking to a suitable parent category, or to another appropriate category (e.g. one that is currently on the article).

Admin instructions

When handling the listings:

1. Make sure that the listing meets one of the above criteria.
2. With the exception of C2E, make sure that it was both listed and tagged at least 48 hours previously.
3. Make sure that there is no opposition to the listing; if there is a discussion, check if the opposing user(s) ended up withdrawing their opposition.

If the listing meets these criteria, simply have the category renamed or merged – follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Administrator instructions, in the section "If the decision is to Rename, Merge, or Delete"; to list it for the bots, use the Speedy moves section.

Applying speedy criteria in full discussions

• A nomination to merge or rename, brought forward as a full CfD, may be speedily closed if the closing administrator is satisfied that:
  • The nomination clearly falls within the scope of one of the criteria listed here, and
  • No objections have been made within 48 hours of the initial nomination.
• If both these conditions are satisfied, the closure will be regarded as having been a result of a speedy nomination. If any objections have been raised then the CfD nomination will remain in place for the usual 7-day discussion period, to be decided in accordance with expressed consensus.

Add requests for speedy renaming and merging here

If the category and desired change do not match one of the criteria mentioned in C2, do not list it here. Instead, list it in the main CFD section.

If you are in any doubt as to whether it qualifies, do not list it here.

Use the following format on a new line at the beginning of the list:

* [[:Category:old name]] to [[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~

(The four ~ will sign and datestamp the entry automatically.)
If the current name should be redirected rather than deleted, use:

* REDIRECT [[:Category:old name]] to [[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~

To note that human action is required, e.g. updating a template that populates the category, use:

* NO BOTS [[:Category:old name]] to [[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~

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

A request may be completed if it is more than 48 hours old; that is, if the time stamp shown is earlier than 03:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 104 open requests ().

Current requests

Please add new requests at the top of the list, preferably with a link to the parent category (in case of C2C) or relevant article (in case of C2D).

• Category:New York Giants (NL) to Category:New York Giants (baseball)
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) personnel to Category:New York Giants (baseball) personnel
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) owners to Category:New York Giants (baseball) owners 
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) scouts to Category:New York Giants (baseball) scouts
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) field personnel to Category:New York Giants (baseball) field personnel
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) managers to Category:New York Giants (baseball) managers 
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) players to Category:New York Giants (baseball) players 
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) executives to Category:New York Giants (baseball) executives
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) announcers to Category:New York Giants (baseball) announcers
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) seasons to Category:New York Giants (baseball) seasons 
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) postseason to Category:New York Giants (baseball) postseason 
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) spring training venues to Category:New York Giants (baseball) spring training venues
  • Category:New York Giants (NL) stadiums to Category:New York Giants (baseball) stadiums – C2D: main article is New York Giants (baseball). Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers for Defence (Ireland) to Category:Ministers for defence of Ireland – C2C: Established naming conventions of subcategories of Category:Government ministers by country. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
  • Category:Ministers for Education (Ireland) to Category:Ministers for education of Ireland
  • Category:Ministers for Foreign Affairs (Ireland) to Category:Ministers for foreign affairs of Ireland
  • Category:Ministers for Justice (Ireland) to Category:Ministers for justice of Ireland
  • Category:Ministers for Social Affairs (Ireland) to Category:Ministers for social affairs of Ireland
  • Category:Ministers for the Environment (Ireland) to Category:Ministers for the environment of Ireland
  • Category:Ministers for transport (Ireland) to Category:Ministers for transport of Ireland
  • Category:Ministers of State of Ireland to Category:Ministers of state of Ireland
• Category:Ministers for Agriculture of Abkhazia to Category:Ministers for agriculture of Abkhazia – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to Category:Ministers for public expenditure, national development plan delivery and reform – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:History of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania to Category:History of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern – C2C: Parent Category:Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. NLeeuw (talk) 16:33, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to Category:Ministers for enterprise, trade and employment – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Uganda to Category:Ministers of justice of Uganda – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:29, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Turkey to Category:Ministers of justice of Turkey – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:29, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Norway to Category:Ministers of justice of Norway – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:28, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Madagascar to Category:Ministers of justice of Madagascar – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:28, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Lithuania to Category:Ministers of justice of Lithuania – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:28, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Lesotho to Category:Ministers of justice of Lesotho – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:26, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Latvia to Category:Ministers of justice of Latvia – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Japan to Category:Ministers of justice of Japan – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Curaçao to Category:Ministers of justice of Curaçao – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Iran to Category:Ministers of justice of Iran – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Württemberg to Category:Ministers of justice of Württemberg – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Thailand to Category:Ministers of justice of Thailand – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Brazil to Category:Ministers of justice of Brazil – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Israel to Category:Ministers of justice of Israel – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Secretaries for Justice of Hong Kong to Category:Secretaries for justice of Hong Kong – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers for Justice of Abkhazia to Category:Ministers for justice of Abkhazia – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Ministers of Justice of Argentina to Category:Ministers of justice of Argentina – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Deputy Prime Ministers of Belgium to Category:Deputy prime ministers of Belgium – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Deputy Prime Ministers of Kyrgyzstan to Category:Deputy prime ministers of Kyrgyzstan – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Deputy Prime Ministers of Slovakia to Category:Deputy prime ministers of Slovakia – C2A: MOS:JOBTITLES. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Tennis players from Rio de Janeiro to Category:Tennis players from Rio de Janeiro (city) – C2B, disambiguation fix from an unqualified name (specifying the city of Rio de Janeiro) Mellamelina (talk) 15:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Martin J. Whitman School of Management alumni to Category:Whitman School of Management alumni – C2B; the parent category at Category:Alumni by business school in the United States shows all the business schools named by the last name and this category shows up out of place because of the Martin J. in the start. Should be ranked simply as Whitman School. Could be left as a REDIRECT page for new additions. Thanks. Kiran_891 ^(TALK) 15:29, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

  Oppose Current title is consistent with Martin J. Whitman School of Management. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:19, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Battles involving the East Frisians to Category:Battles involving East Frisia – C2C: Parent Category:History of East Frisia. NLeeuw (talk) 14:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Fortifications in Dominica to Category:Forts in Dominica – C2C within Category:Forts in the Caribbean by country. This was tagged but accidentally not listed at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_2#Forts_in_the_Caribbean. – Fayenatic London 13:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Battles involving the Ghurids to Category:Battles involving the Ghurid dynasty – C2D: main article Ghurid dynasty. NLeeuw (talk) 13:19, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Cities and town in Lalitpur district, India to Category:Cities and towns in Lalitpur district, India – C2A/C2B Broc (talk) 12:45, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Video gaming slang to Category:Video game slang – C2C: For consistency with Category:Video game terminology (which is not "Video gaming terminology"). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Religion in Qing dynasty to Category:Religion in the Qing dynasty – C2A/C2B

• @Yinweiaiqing: isn't "in" an odd preproposition? I'd say "under" or perhaps "during". Marcocapelle (talk) 06:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Fiction set in circuses to Category:Works set in circuses – C2C: (I hope C2C is the right one) I am moving the one for schools too. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 03:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:World Skate Europe Cup to Category:WSE Cup – C2D * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Template-Class Calvinism articles to Category:Template-Class Reformed Christianity articles – C2C (tagged but not listed) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Rink Hockey European Female League to Category:WSE Women's Champions League – C2D * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Rink Hockey Euroleague to Category:WSE Champions League – C2D * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Prime Ministers of Haiti to Category:Prime ministers of Haiti – C2A (tagged but not listed) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:First Families of Colombia to Category:First families of Colombia – C2A * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:European Women's Roller Hockey Championship to Category:Rink Hockey European Championship Women – C2D (tagged but not listed) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:European Roller Hockey Juvenile Championship to Category:WSE European U-17 Roller Hockey Championship – C2D (tagged but not listed) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:CERH European Roller Hockey Championship to Category:Rink Hockey European Championship – C2D (tagged but not listed) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Continental Cup (rink hockey) to Category:WSE Continental Cup – C2D (tagged but not listed) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Hotline between countries to Category:Hotlines between countries – C2B: WP:SETCAT, more than one hotline. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:01, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Manager of the Year Award winners to Category:Major League Baseball Manager of the Year Award winners – C2D. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Battles by ancient peoples to Category:Battles involving ancient peoples – C2C: Per all children: Battles involving the Fooians. NLeeuw (talk) 16:31, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Cricketers from Chittagong Division to Category:Chittagong Division cricketers - merging. أبو هشام (talk) 15:12, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy; first form is the correct one and this should go to full Cfd, not speedy. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:08, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Assassinated New Caledonian politicians to Category:Assassinated New Caledonia politicians – C2C: parent is Category:New Caledonia politicians Mason (talk) 12:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Assassinated governors to Category:Assassinated governors and heads of sub-national entities – C2C: parent is Governors and heads of sub-national entities Mason (talk) 12:44, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock (season 3) featured content to Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock season 3 featured content – C2D. Gonnym (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock (season 3) good content to Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock season 3 good content – C2D. Gonnym (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock (season 2) featured content to Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock season 2 featured content – C2D. Gonnym (talk) 10:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock (season 2) good content to Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock season 2 good content – C2D. Gonnym (talk) 10:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock (season 3) to Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock season 3 – C2D. Gonnym (talk) 10:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock (season 2) to Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock season 2 – C2D. Gonnym (talk) 10:35, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock (season 1) good content to Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock season 1 good content – C2D. Gonnym (talk) 10:35, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock (season 1) featured content to Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock season 1 featured content – C2D. Gonnym (talk) 10:35, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock (season 1) to Category:Wikipedia featured topics 30 Rock season 1 – C2D. Gonnym (talk) 10:35, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:National Cultural Monuments of the Czech Republic to Category:National cultural monuments of the Czech Republic – C2A. See also Cultural monument (Czech Republic). FromCzech (talk) 08:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Executed OUN members to Category:Executed Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists members – C2C: parent is Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists members Mason (talk) 03:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:888 Holdings to Category:Evoke plc – C2D. Mason (talk) 02:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Baseball players in the United States by populated place to Category:Baseball players from the United States by populated place – C2C. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:57, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Baseball players by city or town in Taiwan to Category:Baseball players from Taiwan by populated place – C2C. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Baseball players by city or town in South Korea to Category:Baseball players from South Korea by populated place – C2C. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Baseball players by city or town in Puerto Rico to Category:Baseball players from Puerto Rico by populated place – C2C. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Baseball players by city or town in Canada to Category:Baseball players from Canada by populated place – C2C. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:55, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Baseball players by city or town in Australia to Category:Baseball players from Australia by populated place – C2C. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:55, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Baseball players by city or town in Mexico to Category:Baseball players from Mexico by populated place – C2C. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:55, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

  C2C to what? Oppose until clarified. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:54, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

  @Armbrust, clarify what precisely? The split should be at the end and the recent Cfd is that "by city and town" in categories, as @Smasongarrison will note, is now "by populated place". Also, WP:C2C because the subcategories are all titled "Baseball players from...". For example, "Category:Baseball players from New York City". Its the standard form. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:44, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

  So I think part of the confusion is that there are multiple elements at play for each of the noms. Omnis it might help if you went through the noms to provide an example for each type. For just looking, I can see city or town -> populated place; moving the stems to the end, and changing people in city in COUNTRY to FOOian people. Aalthough I do agree that c2c does apply, it's a lot to unpack. Mason (talk) 20:48, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

  @Smasongarrison, well there are two basic changes. One is moving the split to the end. The other is bringing them all to one form which is "Baseball players from Foo". I will list one from each category:

  • U.S.: Category:Baseball players from New York City
  • Taiwan: Category:Baseball players from Taipei‎
  • South Korea: Category:Baseball players from Seoul
  • Puerto Rico: Category:Baseball players from San Juan, Puerto Rico
  • Canada: Category:Baseball players from Toronto
  • Australia: Category:Baseball players from Melbourne
  • Mexico: Category:Baseball players from Mexico City

  I hope this clears up any confusion. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:04, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

  @Armbrust, would appreciate a reply so this can either go through or go to full Cfd. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:26, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

  The overwhelming majority of subcategories in Category:Sportspeople by country and populated place uses the “SPORTSPLAYER by city or town in COUNTRY” format (if it’s not about a specific location) and not the one proposed above. I’m not opposed to replacing “city or town” with “populated place”, but IMO rearranging the title of the categories shouldn’t be done speedily. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:32, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

  @Armbrust, in which case they all should change. I will wait for the opinion of @Smasongarrison though before I go through with it since split should be at the end. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

  @Marcocapelle, should I take this to full Cfd or does the previous Cfd on "by populated place" apply here? Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

  It's in line with others changes to actors etc. But a full cfd would allow us to do them all at once. 🤷 Mason (talk) 23:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Opposed requests

• Category:Yoruba Muslim leaders to Category:Yoruba Muslim clergy – C2C: parent is Muslim clergy Mason (talk) 00:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose, not all articles in the category are about clergy. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:52, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

  Move to full? Mason (talk) 12:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

  • @Smasongarrison: fair enough, but I would advocate "religious leaders" rather than "clergy" per the other parent category. Religious leaders is broader than clergy. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

    I'd be fine with religious leaders. Mason (talk) 22:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

    Do not we have consensus here? Ymblanter (talk) 21:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

    • @Ymblanter: consensus yes, but C2C does not apply because the two parent categories have different formats (clergy vs religious leaders). If this were to be speedied, it could be done per WP:IAR. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

      I see, someone should take it to the full discussion. Ymblanter (talk) 06:22, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Azure Striker Gunvolt series to Category:Azure Striker Gunvolt – C2F: No need for a separate games category QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

  I do not think this is eligible under C2F and probably needs to go though a full discussion. Ymblanter (talk) 05:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

  Oops I think I meant the do it other way around. Eh, both categories deserve to get deleted anyway QuantumFoam66 (talk) 20:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

  • @QuantumFoam66: better nominate them at full CfD then. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

On hold pending other discussion

• None currently

Moved to full discussion

• Category:United States politicians killed during the Civil War to Category:Politicians killed in the American Civil War - this new name is shorter and less ambiguous, as the category lists both Union and Confederate politicians who died in the ACW. AHI-3000 (talk) 03:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

  Whereas the argument is compelling, I do not think this is a speedy case. Ymblanter (talk) 21:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

  @Ymblanter: So why is this not suited for speedy renaming? AHI-3000 (talk) 03:26, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

  It should satisfy to one of the above criteria, and I can not see which one. Ymblanter (talk) 05:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

  • Moved to full discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Rebel princes to Category:Princely rebellions – C2D: Princely rebellion. NLeeuw (talk) 10:23, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose, this is a category of princes, not so much of rebellions. Perhaps split. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

  Maybe. Move to full then I guess? NLeeuw (talk) 22:42, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

• Moved to full: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 9#Category:Rebel princes. NLeeuw (talk) 22:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Neo-Latin writers to Category:Writers in Neo-Latin – C2C: Per all child cats and per parent Category:Writers in Latin by period. NLeeuw (talk) 01:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  Oppose This is not very natural language. It is inconsistent with the same level categories "Classical Latin-language writers‎", "Latin-language writers of late antiquity‎", "Medieval Latin-language writers‎", "Old Latin-language writers‎", and "Renaissance Latin-language writers‎".

  This is because "Neo-Latin" etc are actually styles, that are associated with a period. Jim Killock (talk) 05:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Latin-language writers of late antiquity to Category:Writers of late antiquity in Latin – C2C: Per all child cats and per parent Category:Writers in Latin by period. NLeeuw (talk) 00:57, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  Oppose Very clumsy sounding Jim Killock (talk) 05:44, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Classical Latin-language writers to Category:Writers in Classical Latin – C2C: Parent Category:Writers in Latin by period. NLeeuw (talk) 00:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  Oppose Very clumsy sounding Jim Killock (talk) 05:44, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Old Latin-language writers to Category:Writers in Old Latin – C2C: Per all child cats and per parent Category:Writers in Latin by period. NLeeuw (talk) 00:44, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  Oppose Sounds clumsy. Same Jim Killock (talk) 05:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Renaissance Latin-language writers to Category:Renaissance writers in Latin – C2C: Per all child cats and per parent Category:Writers in Latin by period. NLeeuw (talk) 00:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  Oppose Sounds weird per others Jim Killock (talk) 05:44, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Medieval Latin-language writers to Category:Medieval writers in Latin – C2C: Per all child cats and per parent Category:Writers in Latin by period. NLeeuw (talk) 00:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  Oppose Same Jim Killock (talk) 05:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  Oppose Same. These sound weird. Jim Killock (talk) 05:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  @JimKillock The parent Category:Writers in Latin by period and grandparent Category:Writers in Latin and other related categories were all renamed by consensus last year: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 7#Category:Latin-language writers. These are just logical follow-ups to that result. The reason we went for this formula is explained at length in that nom. NLeeuw (talk) 15:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  But these are not "by period"; they are "by style". This especially true for Neo-Latin. The periods and styles often coincide, but not precisely. Better would be to follow the styles defined in the articles, so:

  • Old Latin writers
  • Classical Latin writers
  • Medieval Latin writers
  • Renaissance Latin writers
  • Neo-Latin Latin writers

  I've explained elsewhere that the periods and styles are not precise. For instance, a writer in the Renaissance may have employed Medieval Latin, or Renaissance Latin; and some may define their Renaissance Latin as Neo-Latin. These are stylistic boundaries which roughly match period, but it is the style, not the period, that determines their classifications. Jim Killock (talk) 19:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

  @JimKillock I know. Category:14th-century Neo-Latin writers were a thing; it's good that you created that category. But I don't see how it would create a problem if we renamed it Category:14th-century writers in Neo-Latin. If anything, it is even clearer that "14th-century" refers to "writers" and not to "Neo-Latin", so that we shouldn't assume that the kind of Latin they wrote was Medieval Latin. This is all the more reason in favour of renaming, so that our readers understand the difference between style and period. NLeeuw (talk) 14:03, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

  The issue is that the whole category structure is used to amalgamate and conflate these two ideas. I don't have an easy solution to it, that doesn't involve some work. It's reasonable to say that a C12th Medieval Latin writer used Medieval Latin, or a C20th writer uses Neo-Latin. Boundary centuries seem debateable. However, the structure makes an absolute assumption, that century and style are the same, except where I started to break it up. This has come up in two recent discussions, the other being when someone wanted to remove my boundary category. But it's clear that the intention was that Category:Classical Latin-language writers should contain Classical Latin writers, ie be a style category, not a time category. Likewise, Late Latin and Neo-Latin. There can be doubt about medieval Latin because of it seems to refer to a period rather than a style; however as it is a set of style categories we should assume it is about style, likewise for Renaissance Latin. The fact that the categories group information from centuries is a laziness, nothing more. In short it is a mess but it is only made worse by changing the names to appear to refer to time periods, some of which don't really exist (Classical Latin isn't a time, nor is Latin Latin, nor is Neo-Latin).

  Category:Writers in Classical Latin; Category:Writers in Neo-Latin - these all refer to a style; they are acceptable from that perspective, but they sounds strange / clumsy to my ear; the natural way to say is Category:Classical Latin writers, Category:Neo-Latin writers, or as close to that as WP allows.

  Taking one example to show why the suggested formulation can sound wrong. Category:Writers in Old Latin; Old Latin is recognised as a phase of Latin, rather than a "style" of Latin, so a bit different, but it functions the same. It is like Old English, not quite the same as Modern English. So, "writers in Old Latin" doesn't work because You [verb] in [language]; you don't [person] in [language]. It is either People writing in Old Latin or Old Latin writers. So Category:Old Latin writers sounds better, another option would be Category:Writers using Old Latin.

  Category:Renaissance writers in Latin; Category:Medieval writers in Latin - refer to a time period and remove the style names. These would need to be Category:Writers in Renaissance Latin; Category:Writers in Medieval Latin. This is not great English, most natural would be Category:Medieval Latin writers, Category: Renaissance Latin writers

  So there seems to be some inconsistency of approach in the current suggestion, as well as a somewhat clumsy use of "in" that isn't needed.

  It has taken me some time to pinpoint the issue with "in"; but I think it is because language can be either a noun or an adjective. When it is a style, describing how someone writes, "Classical Latin" etc, is an adjective. If "Classical Latin" is an adjective, then "in" shouldn't be used. If "Classical Latin" is a noun, as with "Classical Latin" the topic then "in" is possible, eg "Grammar in Classical Latin", or "They write in Classical Latin". As an adjective, it works as "Classical Latin writers". --Jim Killock (talk) 00:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

  I suppose this will have to be moved to full then... NLeeuw (talk) 13:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

  Moved to full: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 30#Category:Neo-Latin writers. NLeeuw (talk) 17:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Scholars of Mycenaean Greek to Category:Linguists of Mycenaean Greek – C2C: Uncles/aunts in Category:Linguists by language of study are all named Linguists of Fooian. NLeeuw (talk) 20:47, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Scholars of Medieval Greek to Category:Linguists of Medieval Greek – C2C: Uncles/aunts in Category:Linguists by language of study are all named Linguists of Fooian. NLeeuw (talk) 20:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Scholars of Koine Greek to Category:Linguists of Koine Greek – C2C: Uncles/aunts in Category:Linguists by language of study are all named Linguists of Fooian. NLeeuw (talk) 20:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Scholars of Ancient Greek to Category:Linguists of Ancient Greek – C2C: Uncles/aunts in Category:Linguists by language of study are all named Linguists of Fooian. NLeeuw (talk) 20:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Scholars of Greek language to Category:Linguists of Greek – C2C: Siblings in Category:Linguists by language of study are all named Linguists of Fooian. NLeeuw (talk) 20:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment Nederlandse Leeuw, I don't think the categories for Scholars of Greek are suitable for speedy renaming as the categories contain a mixture of scholars of Greek language and literature. Also Latin is the other classical language and there is no Category:Linguists of Latin. TSventon (talk) 22:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

    @TSventon I discussed thus with @Fayenatic london in another thread (about Category:Grammarians of Persian), he thought it was a good idea. It's virtually impossible to study the literature of a language without also studying the language itself. (I've been studying Old East Slavic as an amateur lately, because I want to write about Rus' chronicles on Wikipedia). Also, Category:Latinists exists; it currently serves the same function as a Category:Linguists of Latin would. NLeeuw (talk) 02:50, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

    Nederlandse Leeuw, I have looked at the content of the categories and am suggesting that these categories are not suitable for speedy renaming. I am happy for the CfD admins to accept or reject my argument. Studying the literature of a language generally involves studying the language itself, but some academics focus more on literature and others on liguistic topics and this is reflected in our categories. Category:Latinists exists and has a Greek counterpart, Category:Hellenists. TSventon (talk) 14:21, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

    Okay. I'm not convinced this makes them unsuitable for speedy renaming, but we'll see. Otherwise I'm happy to move to full, although I think it's unnecessary. NLeeuw (talk) 14:24, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

    I think this kind of discussion is better held at a full CfD than here. Ymblanter (talk) 19:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

    Moved to full: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 April 22#Category:Scholars of Greek language. NLeeuw (talk) 10:06, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

PLEASE NOTE: I have moved all of the following Categories here pending adequate confirmation of their eligibility under C2C. I made a serious effort to look for that, but was unable to find such confirmation. There is a massive jumbled welter of Categories in this realm, with no prevailing pattern that I can discern. Anomalous+0 (talk) 07:16, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

• @Anomalous+0, I have linked Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 December 10#Container categories by descent down below; is that not enough? 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:02, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

• Category:Canadian musicians by ethnic or national origin to Category:Canadian musicians by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:10, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Canadian people by ethnic or national origin and century to Category:Canadian people by descent and century – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:09, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Romanian people by ethnic or national origin and occupation to Category:Romanian people by descent and occupation – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:09, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Northern Mariana Islands people by ethnic or national origin to Category:Northern Mariana Islands people by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:09, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Malaysian politicians by ethnic or national origin to Category:Malaysian politicians by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:French politicians by ethnic or national origin to Category:French politicians by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Dutch politicians by ethnic or national origin to Category:Dutch politicians by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Transnistrian people by ethnic or national origin to Category:Transnistrian people by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:East German people by ethnic or national origin to Category:East German people by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Filipino politicians by ethnic or national origin to Category:Filipino politicians by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Middle Eastern people by ethnic or national origin to Category:Middle Eastern people by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Moldovan politicians by ethnic or national origin to Category:Moldovan politicians by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Cebuano people by ethnic or national origin to Category:Cebuano people by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Indonesian politicians by ethnic or national origin to Category:Indonesian politicians by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:05, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Romanian politicians by ethnic or national origin to Category:Romanian politicians by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:03, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Canadian writers by ethnic or national origin to Category:Canadian writers by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:01, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:Canadian families by ethnic or national origin to Category:Canadian families by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:00, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
• Category:British writers by ethnic or national origin to Category:British writers by descent – C2C. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:55, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose for now to all by ethnic or national origin nominations. 46.229.243.187 (talk) 08:35, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

  Your opposition needs to have a reason. Mason (talk) 13:55, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

The existing wording sounds more natural and is easier to understand. 46.229.243.187 (talk) 14:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

• Moved to full discussion:

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_March_30#Category:English_people_by_ethnic_or_national_origin

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_9#Category:Swedish_politicians_by_ethnic_or_national_origin

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_27#British_people_by_descent

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_May_6#Actors_by_ethnicity

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_May_7#People_from_British_Overseas_Territories_and_Crown_Dependencies_by_ethnic_or_national_origin

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_May_8#People_from_Overseas_France_by_ethnic_or_national_origin

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_May_9#Caribbean_people_by_descent

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_May_17#Category:Romanian_people_by_ethnic_or_national_origin_and_occupation

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_May_17#Category:Northern_Mariana_Islands_people_by_ethnic_or_national_origin

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_May_17#Category:East_German_people_by_ethnic_or_national_origin

Marcocapelle (talk) 06:53, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

• • The English one was closed as Rename. – Fayenatic London 12:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

• Except in the United States, the "by descent" format seems to be standard everywhere. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Ready for deletion

Check Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion for out of process deletions. In some cases, these will need to be nominated for discussion and the editor who emptied the category informed that they should follow the WP:CFD process.

Once the renaming has been completed, copy and paste the listing to the Ready for deletion section of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working/Manual.

Empty categories awaiting deletion

The categories listed below have been identified as empty using {{db-catempty}}, and will be speedily deleted after 7 days unless populated. (Note: Due to technical limitations, all contents of the category may not be displayed; view the category directly to see all contents.)

Empty categories awaiting deletion

Films shot in Sarangani

Norma Waterson albums

Sandeé albums

Czech lepidopterists

WikiProject Justin Timberlake articles

Schools of medicine in Sint Maarten

Schools of medicine in Saba (island)

Schools of medicine in Bonaire

2025 FIFA World Cup

Moon Ska Records compilation albums

20th-century French classical violinists

21st-century French classical violinists

19th-century French classical violinists

Establishments in the Mughal Empire by year

High Commissioners of Tanzania to South Africa

Wikipedia featured topics Better Call Saul (season 6) good content

Wikipedia featured topics Better Call Saul (season 6)

Duncan Sheik audio samples

Actresses from the Principality of Wallachia

Entertainers from the Prinicipality of Wallachia

Entertainers from the Principality of Wallachia

1867 establishments in Croatia

Years in the Mughal Empire

Taxa named by Frederick Hutton

Shellac (band) songs

Protected areas established in 1857

Italian expatriates in the British Empire

11th-century Omani people

Monty Mason

Images with Mathematica source code

Super Sentai Series

Farming knowledge

Defunct companies of Kuwait

1888 in Vietnam

1895 in Vietnam

Tuvaluan Salafis

Sopranos from the Austrian Empire

Defunct hospitals in Hungary

Animators from Mississippi

Labordia

Kamen Rider Series

Deer Clan

Long Hair Clan

2023 murders in Singapore

Smitz albums

Defunct organizations based in Kuwait

1888 in French Indochina

1888 in the French colonial empire

1895 in French Indochina

General Intelligence Department (Jordan)

Pakistani people of British-Jewish descent

2017 murders in Poland

Horse racing venues in Bangladesh

Ironi Ramat Gan coaches

Slovenian novels by writer

Entourage (American TV series) character redirects to lists

Films shot in Nagoya

2024-25 EFL Championship by team

English football clubs 2024-25 season

Bird Clan of the Cherokee

Bear Clan of the Oneida

Wolf Clan of the Oneida

Oneida clans

Blue Clan of the Cherokee

Folded Arms Clan of the Navajo

Many Goats Clan of the Navajo

Raccoon Clan of the Muscogee

Tiger Clan of the Seminole

Seminole clans

Deer Clan of the Cherokee

Long Hair Clan of the Cherokee

Wolf Clan of the Lenape

Turkey Clan of the Lenape

Wind Clan of the Muscogee

Muscogee clans

2023 Ocean Race sailors

Tuvaluan Islamists

Paint Clan of the Cherokee

Wild Potato Clan of the Cherokee

Turtle Clan of the Lenape

Lenape clans

Pages with 2 WikiProject Women in Red banners

Pages with 3 WikiProject Women in Red banners

Pages with 4 WikiProject Women in Red banners

Pages with 5 WikiProject Women in Red banners

Wolf Clan of the Cherokee

Wolf Clan of the Mohawk

Bear Clan of the Mohawk

Mohawk clans

Turtle Clan of the Mohawk

2024 disasters in Thailand

Indian erotica people

WikiProject Addictions and recovery templates

Oudh State

1820s in cricket

2017 establishments in Mauritius

WikiProject Women in Red meetup 311 articles

Wikipedia meetups in July 2024

Publons awards recipients

Rhodesian taxonomists

Tram stops on the Altrincham to Bury line

Tram stops on the Altrincham to Piccadilly line

Tram stops on the Bury to Ashton-under-Lyne line

Tram stops on the East Didsbury to Rochdale line

Tram stops on the Eccles to Piccadilly line

Tram stops on the MediaCityUK to Cornbrook line

2012 Dominican Republic television series debuts

Films shot in Aichi Prefecture

Pages with multiple WikiProject Women in Red banners

Low-importance Jammu and Kashmir road transport articles

Low-importance Kerala road transport articles

Kerala road transport articles by importance

Stub-Class Kerala road transport articles

Kerala road transport articles by quality

Kerala road transport articles

Stub-Class Karnataka road transport articles

Karnataka road transport articles

2012 in Dominican Republic television

2012 establishments in the Dominican Republic

1975 disestablishments in Nova Scotia

Gynecologists from Austria-Hungary

Mid-importance Karnataka road transport articles

Stub-Class Haryana road transport articles

Mid-importance Haryana road transport articles

Pin-up Magazines

1970 disestablishments in Rhode Island

Big Love episode redirects to lists

Films directed by Arnaud Larrieu

Films directed by Jean-Marie Larrieu

2005 disestablishments in Hawaii

Song dynasty Manichaeans

1817 crimes in the United States

1821 crimes in the United States

1820 murders in the United States

1818 murders in the United States

1822 murders in the United States

Actors from the Principality of Wallachia

Former populated places in Henry County, Indiana

Nisma Thurje politicians

Academic staff of the College of Science and Technology (Rwanda)

Flemish woodcarvers

Scottish emigrants to Ecuador

Years in Basutoland

Defunct companies of Lesotho

The Threshold HouseBoys Choir albums

North American people of Arab descent

1727 establishments in the Captaincy General of Chile

Ecuadorian people of Scottish descent

Defunct organisations based in Lesotho

1817 crimes in North America

1821 crimes in North America

1820 crimes in the United States

1820 murders in North America

1820 crimes in North America

1818 crimes in the United States

1818 crimes by country

1818 murders in North America

1818 murders by continent

Ishara TV original programming

1840 murders in Africa

1822 murders in North America

Category-Class Manipur articles of High-importance

Category-Class Indian literature articles of Mid-importance

New nominations by date

August 15

Category:User Wiki-0

Category:User Wiki-0 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

0-level category, which have an extensive history of being deleted. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete/speedy delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete it's going to be reeeeaaaallly hard for someone to add themselves to this category if they don't "know any of editing skills at all", as the userbox puts it. -- Ned Scott 07:34, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

"Wiki skill" categories

Category:User Wiki-1 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Category:User Wiki-2 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Category:User Wiki-3 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

"Wikipedians by editing skill" series of categories. "This user knows basic editing skills", "This user knows adequate editing skills", and "This user knows all editing skills, and is willing to help beginners". 2 of the 3 have no users in them (populated solely by template) and overall useless to categorize since "basic" and "adequate" are subjective, and doubtful many users know all editing skills. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete all as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete too broad. I would not oppose more specific categories, such as our existing ones for templates, Category:Wikipedians who understand ParserFunctions. -- Ned Scott 06:26, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who play Chip's Challenge

"Wikipedians by video game" category, which have an extensive history of deletion. See Chip's Challenge. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

August 11

Category:Wikipedian pigeon fanciers

Category:Wikipedian pigeon fanciers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Per precedent. - jc37 08:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 08:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep as useful cat for finding potential editors to join the domestic pigeon taskforce. Inclusionist Wikipedians? (that could make a CfD) What a joke this place is.--Sting Buzz Me... 12:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - A "pigeon fancier" is apparently not just someone who likes pigeons, but someone who breeds them. I think that this implies a certain level of potentially useful knowledge on the subject of pigeons. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Took a bit of link surfing to find, but according to Animal fancy, this is applied to hobbyists, not professionals. ("Fancy" would apparently seem to be the long form of "fan".) This would seem to be barely a step above pet lovers. - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Ah link surfing now that could become a craze! Once again a Wikipedian armchair expert on everything has decided (all by their lonesome) that by virtue of what they read on another Wikipedia article (OMG it must be true!) that fanciers can only be hobbyists and not professionals? Not experts by your reasoning either I gather? Love the way you use such amazing feats of deduction such as "This would seem to be". Trust me though on this. Some "pet lovers" are definitely experts in their field. I still reckon we should CfD Inclusionist Wikipedians though. Mainly because of the outrageously funny fact of you being in it. Oh my sides are splitting.--Sting Buzz Me... 11:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Perhaps as "outrageously funny" as someone making accusations about an editor without doing more thorough research? Though perhaps more akin to irony, actually, I think.

  Incidentally, nothing in your comments above have changed my perspective. For one thing, even if "some" pet lovers are indeed experts in their field (and I do not dispute that), that doesn't mean that all are. And more to our current situation, that doesn't necessarily mean that all who are in the category are. And further, based on the name of the category, there is no reason to believe that they are, nor that they should be required to be, to categorise themselves as such. I would be more than happy to discuss a cat concerning "professionals" in regards to pigeons. But this isn't it.

  That said, I would welcome verifiable reliable sources supporting your belief. - jc37 21:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Would you? Yeah I did say "Some" and I had known that doesn't mean "all" are. "more akin to irony"? Here's irony. My honest opinion is that the cat is useful. You may never agree that it is but that's your right to have that opinion. I'm happy to let the community consensus here decide if the cat stays or goes. Discuss a cat concerning professionals? Well lets wait and see if this cats survives the CfD first. If it goes I'll create another perhaps more suitable cat?--Sting Buzz Me... 12:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep per Black Falcon. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 16:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Per Black Falcon. Does not appear to be on the same level as "Wikipedian with a dog or fish". -- Ned Scott 01:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comment - Note that there is a related article to this, Pigeon keeping. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedian storywriters

Category:Wikipedian storywriters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This illustrates how problematic Category:Wikipedian writers (nomination directly below) is. So apparently this cat was created to be "more specific". Except that while there may be a term for storyteller, there isn't one for storywriter. This is a question of being an author. I might suggest a rename to substitute "authors", but I'm not certain we wouldn't have the same problem below of vagueness. So, while no prejudice against the creation of a "authors" cat, not necessarily supporting its creation (if it were listed here, for example). - jc37 08:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 08:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - No article means no way this can facilitate collaboration, plus the fact that most people are required to write stories at some point during schooling, so this is potentially all-inclusive...Unless this is supposed to be a profession category? That brings us back to the fact there is no article, VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedian writers

Category:Wikipedian writers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This is a vague cat that is rather all-encompassing (as can be seen by the category membership). - jc37 08:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete as nom. - jc37 08:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep or rename as a profession/skill category. We probably should make it clear that this is meant for editors who actually make a living and/or are particularly skilled at writing, rather than just being interested in writing as a hobby, etc. -- Ned Scott 08:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep but agree with Ned. It should be for people who actually write books or short stories or are particularly skilled. --Bduke (talk) 11:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comment - The best way I know how would be to rename the cat. However by doing so, we will be essentially repurposing the cat. And when dealing with a category this large, I don't think we can presume that everyone within are professionals. (Several userboxes which populate the cat clearly do not concern professionals, and since are subst-ed, this will require more than a bit of clean-up at the very least.) The best way (that I know) is to delete/depopulate and start over with a new cat with a more accurate name and inclusion criteria. This prevents accidental miscategorisation. I think it's better to start over, than to, by keeping, make inaccurate statements about an editor that the editor never intended. Though I obviously welcome other ideas. - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• Sounds reasonable to me. -- Ned Scott 01:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedian paratroopers

Category:Wikipedian paratroopers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Similar to cyclists, below, this is presumably a single article cat. (And has only 2 members.) - jc37 07:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 07:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• No, it is not a single article category. See Category:Parachuting which is extremely well populated. Keep. There is scope for collaboration here. --Bduke (talk) 11:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  There is a difference between a skydiver (parachutist?) and a paratrooper. I would not oppose the creation of a cat directly related to parachuting. As both skydiver and skydiving redirect to parachuting, something like Category:Wikipedian skydivers (or Category:Wikipedian parachutists, if that's more accurate). And then merge the paratrooper cat into the broader one. - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedian cyclists

Category:Wikipedian cyclists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

There is a difference between being a cyclist (riding or driving a (bi-)cycle), and being someone interested in cycling-related topics, such as sports. See also these UCFDs for precedent. - jc37 07:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 07:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. First, please get your links correct. This is the second one I have corrected. You are confusing wikilinks and full URLs. Check them before you save the edit. I am unconvinced by the links you mention which are all concerned with cars, mainly individual makes of cars. Cycling has a wider scope: relaxation, sport, travel, etc. There is scope for collaboration here. --Bduke (talk) 11:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  You will be hard-pressed to find a single thing applied to cycling that isn't applied as well by car drivers. And that indeed includes relaxation, sport, travel, etc.

  That aside, the main thing is that there is no actual "skill" involved that every person on the planet doesn't have easily. This is roughly equivalent to "Wikipedians who can use a drill". There is no expectation of much technical expertise. Merely that the person is able to go out for a ride on their "cycle". - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - According to the Cycling article, anyone who has ever used a bicycle could qualify for this category, which is probably almost all of Wikipedia. A more focused category would be a better idea for collaboration. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedian crystallographers

Category:Wikipedian crystallographers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

See Crystallography and (based on the presumed intent of the category per its intro) X-ray crystallography.

First, at the very least this needs a more specific rename per the general article.

Second, following the rename, this would presumably become a single-article cat.

Note also that every member is as a result of this userbox. - jc37 07:40, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 07:40, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep crystallographer are helpful in more than just crystallography. Keep as a skill category. -- Ned Scott 08:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  Even if kept, it still would need a rename for clarity per crystallography. - jc37 08:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  Aye, a rename would be fine with me. -- Ned Scott 09:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep — Assuming these people are actually crystallographers, not just people interested in crystallography, it is important to keep these people identified for cases when a specialist is needed. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 08:34, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  Just curious: Did you even read the article? - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Which article? You linked two. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 04:47, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. A small group but it might grow. The two of them both claim a PhD in the subject. There is no harm and some value in being able to identify an expert in a particular subject. I did not know it exists and I might well call on them now for help with an article. --Bduke (talk) 10:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  If experts, then it would presumably be helpful if we knew specifically what they were an expert in. As such (and as I mentioned above), this at least needs a rename. - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. No harm demonstrated. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 16:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Well, for one thing, lack of clarity in categorisation is a hindrance to navigation.

Category:Wikipedians with a Linux Professional Institute Certification

Category:Wikipedians with a Linux Professional Institute Certification (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

See also Linux Professional Institute.

Single editor cat, for a (non-professional?) certification. - jc37 07:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 07:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia editors willing to make difficult edits

Category:Wikipedia editors willing to make difficult edits (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

See this previous UCFD, which noted a MfD of the related list page. There is also a second MfD which resulted in no consensus.

See also the populating userbox.

In all of the discussions noted above, the main concern appeared to be "I don't know...". Simply, this is too vague. It requires explanations, both of the types of specific individual "difficult edits", and why this applies to each editor. This is clearly something that applies on a case-by-case basis. As such, this should be a list, not a category. And since it already has a list, nothing should be lost by removing this category. - jc37 04:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Listify/Delete - as nominator. - jc37 04:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• The idea for this followed the idea of similar categories and lists for admins. The reason was, if I recall it all correctly, that there were times when those editors who were known by their real names, and even those whose anon names might not be sufficient to maintain total anonymity, would be afraid to make edits because they, or their families, might be hassled in real life. Thus there was a reason to know those editors who were fully protected from outside hassling and attack. I hesitate to delete either the category or the list unless this issue is actually addressed, so for now I say keep. Editors have been forced off wikipedia by outside threats and attacks. There are editors who actually have nothing to fear and are willing to list themselves to help out. I think we should encourage them, not discourage them. --Bduke (talk) 11:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  All of those things may be true. But I don't believe (in reading over the list page) that that is true for all those including themselves, either on the list or the category. I think each person has ascribed to themselves what they feel is making "difficult edits", and as such should be allowed to explain that in the same place as their inclusion in this "grouping". So, per WP:CLN, this should be a list. - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• Rename - "Difficult" has different meanings. A category for those willing to make the edits Bduke mentions above may very well be useful. Then again, users may add themselves to this category because they are proficient in templates, and consider "difficult" to be more technical difficulty rather than socially difficult. VegaDark (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Also Not opposed to lisification. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
• Listify/delete - As noted by VegaDark, "difficult" can mean many different things; a list is much better suited to this type of case than a category. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedian members of micronations

Category:Wikipedian members of micronations (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

See Template:User WikiProject Micronations.

At first, this looked like a WikiProject category that needed to be renamed. However Category:WikiProject Micronations participants already exists (with several of the same editors). See also Template:User WikiProject Micronations. As it stands, this should be deleted as vague. (Which specific micronation(s)?) - jc37 03:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete as nominator. - jc37 03:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Merge if this category is intended for members in the Wikiproject, if not, delete. VegaDark (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per nom; this category does not foster collaboration. In some cases, someone can become a "member" of a micronation just by paying €20, €50, or €100 for a shiny certificate. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who write for the WikiPolitics blog

Category:Wikipedians who write for the WikiPolitics blog (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

See also the userbox, and http://wikipolitics.blogspot.com

Per much precedent. - jc37 03:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete as nominator. - jc37 03:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Is this at all officially associated with Wikimedia? If not, delete, if so, possibly keep. VegaDark (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - I don't think that this is associated with Wikimedia; if it's not, the userbox is more than adequate to express the information. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - Even as a writer, I vote delete. This category doesn't do anything constructive for the encyclopedia. And no, it is not associated to Wikimedia. Leonard^(Bloom) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who have access to JSTOR

Category:Wikipedians who have access to JSTOR (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Single editor cat. - jc37 03:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 03:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep and find more members. This has great potential for us, if people which access to the JSTOR are willing to use it to help other editors by request. -- Ned Scott 08:16, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. Agree with Ned. --Bduke (talk) 11:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep and populate. Incredibly useful to collaboration if we can increase awareness. Hiding T 00:29, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - if it attracts more members, it could be useful for verification and article expansion requests. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. More needed. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 16:29, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename to some convention other than "who have access to" per my comments below. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians by access to research sites

Category:Wikipedians by access to research sites (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

There are innumerable websites which require a sign-in to gain even partial access. Various newspapers, journals, libraries, dictionaries, encyclopedias, and the like. Is this a precedent that we wish to start?

Incidentally, it only has a single member; a subcat (which also has only a single member) which I've added above. If the single member subcat is deleted, then this could be deleted per WP:CSD#C1 - empty. - jc37 03:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 03:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep a somewhat new category, and a great new idea. Also per my comments in the above uCfD. -- Ned Scott 08:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Noting that I'm fine with the rename proposed below. -- Ned Scott 01:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. Again, I am agreeing with Ned. We can use references from all sorts of places. The scientific literature for example is available in libraries, but one often can not get internet access. Those, like myself, who can are valuable to check references that editors might be claiming establishes a point. As Ned says, this is great new idea, not something to pull down. --Bduke (talk) 11:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename to Category:Wikipedians by access to a digital library Category:Wikipedians by access to digital libraries (JSTOR is located in Category:Digital libraries), since the JSTOR category (nominated above) needs a parent. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • If kept, I support a Rename. If "a digital library" (singular is better) is the proper term, then support. - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    • You're right, the singular is better. Ideally, the title should indicate that the category is only for digital libraries or research websites that restrict access (anyone can access Google Books, so a category for that is not useful). However, I've not been able to think of something other than "Wikipedians by access to a restricted digital library", which does not really convey the principle. Perhaps a category description could be used... –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
      • "Restricted" may be the best choice. Any other ideas welcome. - jc37 21:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename per Black Falcon. Keep at least. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 16:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• My primary concern with this category is the "By access to" part. People have access to plenty of things, but it doesn't mean they are necessarily going to use that access to help Wikipedia. Now, presumably people aren't going to add themselves to this category, and then when someone asks for them to use it to help get information for an article, they aren't going to say "sorry, I only have access to this, why the hell did you think I would actually use it to help?", but to avoid any possible confusion or chance of this happening I'd prefer some sort of rename. I don't think the majority of users would do this, but I do think that some users (most likely the ones who are in hundreds of user cats) scour through the categories to see which ones they could add, without actually wanting to collaborate. If we rename it, that problem is eliminated, but I'm not sure what the name should be (and I certainly don't oppose the "digital library" portion of the rename proposed). VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who contribute to Wikimedia Commons

Category:Wikipedians who contribute to Wikimedia Commons (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

(Nominating this as a test case.)

Now that SUL has been implemented, technically we all have, or easily can have, an account on any sister project. So contribution is merely to click a link (let's say on an image page) and you're instantly editing at commons, perhaps without even knowing.

On the other hand, being considered a contributor at commons might be an indirect indication of knowledge about images, however, that's: a.) not necessarily true, so b.) shouldn't be a reason to categorise, since it's not necessarily accurate.

This nom is not intended to include the cat's subcat. - jc37 03:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 03:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - per Jc37. Cirt (talk) 03:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comment — not everyone with a Wikipedia account has unified their account. Many probably never will, whose interest lies solely with the encyclopedia. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 03:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  If an editor's interest is only to edit the encyclopedia, then they likely won't be editing at Commons, and therefore wouldn't be a member of the category : ) - jc37 03:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  That is exactly my point. It identifies which people at Wikipedia do contribute to Commons. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 21:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep The category is not for users who haven an account at Commons, but who actively contribute to Commons. SUL shouldn't impact this at all. -- Ned Scott 08:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  If in the category, you have an account on Wikipedia. If you have an account, then... - In other words, the same rationale still applies. - jc37 08:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  No, because you can have an account and have no contribs. Regardless, this is obviously talking about active users. -- Ned Scott

  The point is that saying this is nearly like saying: "Wikipedians who contribute to Wikipedia". As Commons' user list is now only a click away, how is this helpful? - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Because not everyone will make that click. It would be easy for everyone to download and use the Safari web browser, and then join Category:Wikipedians who use Safari, but not everyone wants to. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 04:54, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - Unsure on this one. On one hand, I agree that this category is for those that contribute there, not necessarily for those who have an account there. On the other hand, what qualifies as "contribute"? Can editors who have one edit on Commons add themselves to this category? Perhaps a good compromise would be to rename the category to Category:Wikipedians who are active on Wikimedia Commons or something similar. "Active" is still subjective, but IMO decreases the chance that editors who only have a few edits there will add themselves to the category. When we get to the root of the category, the implication is that the category will be used for those looking for help about something related to Commons (who, presumably, is also familiar with Wikipedia, or why not just look on commons for someone?), so perhaps a rename (or deletion of this, and creation of a new category) targeted towards that use is a better idea. VegaDark (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per Ned Scott and Twas Now. bibliomaniac15 21:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  Please see my comments above. - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  I read them before putting in my keep decision. It's my belief that SUL has little to do with this, and that activity is more important. bibliomaniac15 16:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  My last comment (to Ned Scott) was posted after your "decision" - which was what I was referring to. My apologies for not being clearer. I'm still interested in your thoughts in regards to it. - jc37 21:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep Commons experience is specialized enough that I consider any method by which one may find an editor to be a Good Thing. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedian Wikisource administrators

Rename Category:Wikipedian Wikimedia Commons administrators to Category:Wikimedia Commons administrators

Rename Category:Wikipedian Wikisource administrators to Category:Wikisource administrators

To remove "Wikipedian", which is redundant in this case. May qualify for speedy. - jc37 02:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Rename both - as nominator. - jc37 02:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename both - per Jc37. Cirt (talk) 03:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename both — Helps to disambiguate. However, by removing mention that the category is for "Wikipedians", this category becomes open to article-space. Notable people with Wikipedia articles, who happen to be admins on those projects (are there any?) could be included in the renamed categories. Actually, I guess it is technically the user who is the administrator, not the physical person. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 03:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename both, but to Category:Wikipedians who are Wikimedia Commons Administrators and Category:Wikipedians who are Wikisource administrators. I actually agree with Twas Now's crossed out statement that this does in theory open up the category for mainspace pages. VegaDark (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  How? - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedian administrators on sister projects

Rename Category:Wikipedian administrators on sister projects to Category:Wikipedians who are administrators on sister projects

To clarify that these are other project admins, not Wikipedia admins who contribute to other projects. - jc37 02:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Rename as nominator. - jc37 02:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename. Definitely a useful category that could use a rename. bibliomaniac15 02:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename. Thanks Bibliomaniac15 :) - Cirt (talk) 03:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename per nominator. --Bduke (talk) 11:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename per nom, more clear. VegaDark (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename as suggested. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 21:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename per nom's suggestion. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

August 10

Category:User:The Twenty Thousand Tonne Bomb

Category:The Twenty Thousand Tonne Bomb (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This is another user-related category, which have been repeatedly deleted in the past. - jc37 21:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - per precedent, as nominator. - jc37 21:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - User talk:The Twenty Thousand Tonne Bomb#A couple of requests --Van helsing (talk) 22:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete — this is proof that there is no god. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 00:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete — Even the templates must be deleted. --SkyWalker (talk) 12:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I have solved all of these problems, so let it be. -- 20000 ^Talk/_{Contributions} 13:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Actually, the template is perfectly fine; it just needs to be moved to a subpage of the user's user page. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 15:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Let me rephrase that: the template itself is fine, but its use on image pages (see Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:User 20000) is not. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 20:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete as a personal userspace category (see extensive precedent). Editors who wish to keep track of pages in their userspace can do so using Special:Prefixindex (see e.g., Special:Prefixindex/User:The Twenty Thousand Tonne Bomb). –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 15:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy delete per extensive precedent to deleted individual userspace categories. VegaDark (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Very Strong Keep -- SCARFACE 20:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Confirmed sockpuppet; indef-blocked. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Category:User:The Twenty Thousand Tonne Bomb? This should have been speedy deleted immediately. Can someone delete it soon, please? — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • No, not yet. Very Strong Keep as this is vital to The Bomb's survival. -- Prem ^{(Give me some banter)} 21:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC) — Prem01 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
    • Confirmed sockpuppet; indef-blocked. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy delete - The originator stated on another archived page "Ian Cairns accepted the category as it wasn't in the main namespace of category naming. If you talk to him, he'll tell you all about it.". I should like to put on record that I did nothing of the sort. I complained about the use of a user category 'The Twenty Thousand Tonne Bomb' which omitted the prefix Wikipedians, since it had become highlighted in Uncategorized categories. I suggested that a category starting with 'Wikipedian' or 'Wikipedians associated with' should be alright. I did not accept anything, and anyhow I don't count. I did thank him for changing the original category. Ian Cairns (talk) 21:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• All of these Keep votes were made by an IP (92.1.239.69 (talk · contribs)). — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 21:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • They also say "as per above", despite the absence anywhere above of rationale to keep the article. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 21:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Slovak Republic Wikipedians

Category:Slovak Republic Wikipedians (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Merge to Category:Wikipedians in Slovakia. I cannot understand how these are different or why both are necessary. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Merge both to whatever consensus determined the current name of the country is, per convention. Note that the article is currently at Slovakia, which states: "Slovakia [[...] long form: Slovak Republic" - jc37 21:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
• Merge per nom to match the article name, as per standard practice. VegaDark (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• I get confused with these. Isn't it possible some Slovak Republic Wikipedians are not in Slovakia, and some editors in Slovakia are not Slovak Republic Wikipedians? Hiding T 00:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Me too. Or further, that this could have been a question of nationalistic ferver? (Something also not uncommon in naming.) However, from everything I can tell, one is just a longer form of the other. This seems to merely be like "United States" and "United States of America". (I was thinking to use the example of "United Kingdom" and "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland", but then, there are those...) - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• This is a nationality category, not a location category. It is populated primarily by {{User Slovak Republic}}, which states "This user comes from Slovakia." Someone who is from Slovakia could be living in Anadyr, Urucurituba, or in a tent at the base of Mount Everest; moreover, s/he could be of Belgian, Canadian, Indonesian, or Zambian origin. All that this category tells us about the users in it is that they were either born or grew up within the boundaries of the Slovak Republic. I don't see how this type of grouping could facilitate encyclopedic collaboration, so I am currently leaning toward deleting this category. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  I don't oppose deletion on those grounds, but I would like the members to be informed of the potential replacement options ("in" or "from"), presuming one of them applies. - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

August 9

Category:Wikipedians in (parts of) London

Category:Wikipedians in east London

Category:Wikipedians in southeast London

Category:Wikipedians in Croydon

Speedy rename at least to match East London, England.

As for the nom for deletion, the category inclusion criteria (duplicated in each) says it all: "Wikipedians who feel they are connected with east London in some way, possibly by living there."

"in some way"? "posibly living there"?

Also, while I did not nominate it, is Category:Wikipedians in Wimbledon miscategorised? Should a sub-urb of a city be considered "in" that city? I don't think so. (I think it's a naming confusion between London and Greater London.) Discussion welcome, though perhaps it could/should be moved to that category's talk page.

• Delete all as nom. However, more discussion, and other suggestions (such as renames or merges), welcome. - jc37 08:02, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep all. London is Very Large. Being able to find other Wikipedians nearby is of benefit. I've fixed the wording that was objected to. And yes, "sub-urbs" [sic] of a city are in that city. The distinction between London and Greater London is irrelevant to this discussion. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 22:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

  Why do you feel that it's "irrelevant"? - jc37 21:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

  Why do you feel that it's relevant? These categories relate to parts of London, which is located in an administrative subdivision called Greater London (which is not the same as the Greater London Urban Area). The only person ever to have mentioned Greater London in connection with these categories is you, so I can only imagine that that is where the confusion lies. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 16:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  jc37, I think the point is that these subdivisions are sort of like the boroughs of New York (there are 32 boroughs of London, so I won't suggest that "boroughs" are equivalent in both cities). However, "Wikipedians in London" still needs to be recategorized in some other way—the link from Category:Wikipedians in southeast London goes to Plumstead, which to me appears to be closer to the northeast, and Croydon doesn't seem any greater than, say, Chelsea, and neither should have its own category. Making a subcategory for each of the 32 boroughs is way too much, but something like splitting London into 3–8 regions might do. The regions would have to be commonly used by Londoners themselves to describe parts of the city; we shouldn't impose on them divisions that most Londoners aren't familiar with. As a suggestion:

  • Category:Wikipedians in Central London
  • Category:Wikipedians in East London
  • Category:Wikipedians in South London
  • Category:Wikipedians in West London
  • Category:Wikipedians in North London

  However, people could be in up to three categories, depending on their location (e.g. Hackney and Tower Hamlets are found in the Central, East, and North based on the maps in the articles). — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  "Plumstead, which to me appears to be closer to the northeast" - your unfamiliarity with London is showing. This city is divided into north and south halves by the Thames. Plumstead is south of the river. Anyway, I think that Plumstead is not representative of southeast London and have removed the link. Also, all your suggestions are incorrectly capitalized; there is no formally-named "West London", etc. The user categories were formerly capitalized in this fashion; I corrected that because it conflicted with East London, Eastern Cape. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 11:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  So, in other words, this is vague, inaccurate categorisation, with probable overlap? - jc37 08:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Not entirely. The :Category:Wikipedians in Croydon is neither vague nor inaccurate and would lead to no overlap if we categorise by London borough, which seems the only plausible way forwards if we can not leave those people who know what they are doing to sort themselves out quietly and let them get on with it as they see fit. I would retain the status quo because no harm has been demonstrated. Hiding T 09:29, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Exactly. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 11:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Honestly, I don't oppose Wikipedians in London being split up into subcats by borough. Sounds to me like it may be the most accurate way to do it. And not concerned with there being 20 subcats, presuming that's the best way to do it, and presuming that each would not be created (split from the parent) until they were "needed" (typically 4 or more members). Which, I believe "Wikipedians in Croydon", at least, would qualify for? - jc37 21:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Worrying about the "most accurate way" at this point really is premature optimization. I suggest coming back to this issue when there are about ten times more editors in these categories. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 00:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

  Earle Martin, my suggestion was not to be interpreted as what should be done, but as a step in the right direction. According to each of their articles there are no official definitions for "Central London", "East London", "South London", or "North London" either, so why point out there is no formal "West London"? On the other hand the London Plan is pretty formal, and it divides London into precisely those subdivisions (including West London, a-ha!). Since I wasn't sure of this document's popularity or widespread acceptance, I didn't authoritatively say: "These are the subdivisions! We must categorize according to the London Plan!"

  Naming convention would obviously be whatever Londoners think suitable, based on accepted, common-use subdivisions, and capitalization would be whatever is official, yet avoids ambiguity. As I said, this should not be decided upon by outsiders, since we don't want to impose locally obscure subdivisions onto Londoners. Did this get past you, or is there another reason you decided to point out the easily-correctable (and obviously non-authoritative) flaws with my suggestion? — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 03:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• Keep all. London has 7 million inhabitants covering 600 square miles! best, Sunil060902 (talk) 17:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• The first one needs renaming to match East London, England at minimum. Delete the second one- South East London is a disambiguation page, pointing towards South London. The third one is an interesting case, since Croydon isn't a city in itself, but rather a place within a City. I believe we have a similar category for Queens, New York. I'm inclined to keep this type of category if there is an article on the location, and if the population of this location seems big enough for collaboration potential. There is no mention of the population at the Croydon page, but looking over the article I would imagine this more than meets the population requirements. I'd like to revisit this series of categories in the future, however. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

August 8

Category:Wikipedians interested in userboxes

Category:Wikipedians interested in userboxes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

We already have Category:Wikipedians who create userboxes, I'm not sure how those "interested in" userboxes would be beneficial to the encyclopedia to categorize. VegaDark (talk) 01:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 01:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Probably a mistake as it is underpopulated. Agree with nom. --Bduke (talk) 00:17, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete or else create Category:Wikipedians interested in wikilinks, Category:Wikipedians interested in templates, and other such gobbledygook. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 01:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - The "interested in" tree (based on current convention, anyway) is only for Wikipedians by interest in an article topic. In addition, this category is vague in that it isn't clear what the interest in userboxes is. Is it an interest to place them on a userpage? An interest to edit or modify them? Create them? Look at them? The concept of them? With the exception of modify/create, I don't see a purpose leading to collaboration. And as Category:Wikipedians who create userboxes already exists, this one can and should be deleted. - jc37 21:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

  It could be sexual interest. This is a classifieds section, the other half is Category:Userboxes interested in Wikipedians. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 21:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

  I have to admit... That was rather humourous  : ) - jc37 21:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per above. By the way, we did have an article on userboxes, but it was deleted. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 15:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

August 6

Category:Wikipedians who translate pages into English

Category:Wikipedians who translate pages into English - Template:Lc1

The present title of this category, while technically accurate, is somewhat confusing. This is not just a general category for anyone who translates pages into English, or for users who have made themselves available to translate content from certain languages to English (see Category:Available translators in Wikipedia), but rather a specific category for users who help out at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English. A little over 100 of the 112 pages in the category are there due to {{User wikipedia/Pages needing translation into English}}, and the rest are probably substed instances of the template. To avoid ambiguity, I think that the category should be renamed; however, I'm unable to offer a good alternative at this time. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Rename to Category:Wikipedians who contribute to Pages needing translation into English (or weak rename to "...who participate in..."). The capitalised "P" of pages should help clarify that this is a project. - jc37 21:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename per jc37, barring any further suggestions. VegaDark (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians interested in JCI

Category:Wikipedians interested in JCI - Template:Lc1

This is a category for current or former members of Junior Chamber International. As such, it should be renamed to Category:Wikipedians in Junior Chamber International or deleted as with most other "Wikipedians by organisation" categories. While the possible collaborative scope of this category is not limited to just one article (see Category:Junior Chamber International), it is relatively narrow for an interest category. (Also note that the category currently contains only two actual users.) Moreover, no encyclopedically-relevant knowledge or ability seems to be readily apparent from membership in this category.

• Delete (1st choice) or rename (2nd choice) to Category:Wikipedians in Junior Chamber International as nominator. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• Rename I wouldn't be opposed to reviewing the deletion request after another month or two, since it's been created somewhat recently (To see if other users add themselves, and to see how it might play out in collaboration). -- Ned Scott 22:10, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete (1st choice) or rename (2nd choice) per nom. Seems a bit narrow for collaboration, and per "no encyclopedically-relevant knowledge or ability seems to be readily apparent from membership in this category". VegaDark (talk) 01:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - Looks like 3 userboxes, and 3 members. And while this isn't a single article cat, it's rather close. In addition, this is service organisation, so it doesn't even qualify for the exception (the no consensus) of computing/engineering topic-related organisation cats (Category:Wikipedians by computing or engineering organization). So delete per precedent as well. - jc37 21:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Category:NRI or PIO Wikipedians

Category:NRI or PIO Wikipedians - Template:Lc1

According to the Wikipedia article, the scope of this category extends at minimum to anyone who is:

(1) An Indian citizen who has migrated to another country,

(2) A person of Indian origin who is born outside India,

(3) A person of Indian origin who resides outside India,

(4) A person of Indian origin, up to four generations removed, who is not a citizen of India,

(5) A spouse of a person of Indian origin, up to four generations removed, who is not a citizen of India,

The primary function of user categories is to facilitate encyclopedic collaboration, and this category does not do that, in part due to its inclusiveness, in part due to the fact that there is really no encyclopedically-relevant reason to seek out anyone on the basis of these characteristics, and in part due to the redundancy created by the existence of Category:Indian Wikipedians (an "origin" category), Category:Wikipedians in India (a "residence" category), and other similar categories for other ethnicities, nationalities, and locations.

• Delete as nominator (see also this related discussion). Since the people in this category are not necessarily even of Indian origin (see #5 above), merging to Category:Indian Wikipedians may introduce miscategorisation and should probably be avoided. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 01:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Indian Wikipedian citizens

Category:Indian Wikipedian citizens - Template:Lc1

This is a category for users who are citizens of the Republic of India. For the purposes of user categorisation, which is intended to provide tools to facilitate encyclopedic collaboration between users, knowing the citizenship of another users is not particularly relevant, particularly when Category:Indian Wikipedians already exists.

• Delete (1st choice) or merge to Category:Indian Wikipedians as nominator. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - Does not help to categorize by citizenship. VegaDark (talk) 01:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who add interwiki links

Category:Wikipedians who add interwiki links - Template:Lc1

It's hard to imagine that this category could facilitate encyclopedic collaboration, or that there might be any reason to specifically seek out someone who adds interwiki links. The task of adding interwiki links is a fairly simple one (for the most part it is done by bots) and I do not think that this category reflects any special ability, knowledge, or understanding.

• Delete as nom. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 04:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Delete - Is there more to this than those who run bots to add the interwikilinks? - jc37 07:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

  Not that I'm aware. I know it's often also done manually (usually by IP accounts, in my experience), and I sometimes do it in foreign-language Wikipedias when I notice a missing link, but the process involves no special skill or ability that I can think of (an understanding of multiple languages is helpful but usually not strictly necessary). –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 14:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

  After reading over InterWiki (and other related pages), I've changed to strong delete. The problem here is that the category doesn't specify (and can't specify per it's current name, and, based on the userbox, its current intent) that this is limited to Wikimedia projects, but rather includes the addition of any Wiki links. (See also History of wikis). As such, this is about as useful as "Wikipedians who edit a wiki somewhere". As anyone who edits can add a link by adding brackets with an antecedent, such as noted at m:Help:Interwiki linking. See also the Wikipedia Interwiki-Link-Checker, for a (presumably) Wikimedia-related interwiki tool. - jc37 21:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Weak keep — these users may want to collaborate in efforts to add interwiki links. From my understanding, bots only add interwiki links if one of the pages has the interwiki link, but the other does not. For example, if en:paper has an interwiki link to fr:papier, but fr:papier does not have a link to en:paper, then the bot will add it to fr:papier. If none of the pages have the original interwiki link, however, then the bot will not add to both. This is why we need editors, who generally will need some degree of multilingual skills. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 16:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Can't you just add a line to the userbox that says something like "You can help!!!". Nobody is going to get to this category by mistake; you don't just type in "Wikipedians who add interwiki links" into the search box. So about the only way to get there is via one of the user pages that are in the category, and both of them have the user box. --Kbdank71 16:42, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Some people do them by hand (there are several technical limitations on the bots that prevent them from covering all interwiki links). This is as valid as any other collaborative category on the wiki. I do not find it hard to imagine such users looking to find each other, discuss issues and tools related to the task, and so on. -- Ned Scott 22:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per Ned Scott. Perhaps this category should become a task force. There must be some WikiProject that would be interested in promoting the addition of interwiki links. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - Per InterWiki I share some of the same concerns as jc37. Without prejudice of creating a more specifically named category for the activities the users above mention, however. VegaDark (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Cleanup Taskforce members who have been asked to re-register

Category:Cleanup Taskforce members who have been asked to re-register (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

First, this category has no indication it is a user category, so it at minimum needs some sort of rename. Second, this category was attached to a template sent to users approximately a year ago asking them to re-sign up for the cleanup taskforce, and there is no indication it was removed if/when these users actually did re-sign up, so there may be users who did that yet are still listed in this category. Finally, this would do better as a list at the cleanup taskforce page rather than a category if they still want to keep track of this. VegaDark (talk) 03:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete/Listify as nom. VegaDark (talk) 03:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• Listify - This is one of those cases where a category isn't the best idea, per WP:CLN (Yes, I realise it's not categorising articles, but this is a similar situation). The category doesn't explain "why" each was asked. That would be better done as a list (including dates, and so on). - jc37 07:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• Listify per nom and jc37; there are multiple lists here and here. Just as a list is maintained for those who have re-registered, a list can be maintained for those who've been asked to re-register. The precedent of CFD - 'Category:New users to WP:NOVELS' may be relevant. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 14:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• Keep and rename to something like "past taskforce members" or "inactive taskforce members", both of which are a valid use of user categories. -- Ned Scott 22:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

  Actually, they're not (I can see about digging up several past precedents if you would like). Categories exist in the "present tense". So (albeit with a few notable exceptions) no former or future cats. For example, Missing Wikipedians. These are all better served as a list, since reasons (if any) can be explained, as can dates in relation to the activity. (And a list is just a better historical record, which is, I presume, the actual intent of this category.) - jc37 21:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)