Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 December 3

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

The result of the discussion was: Reverse merge. (non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 16:55, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Automotive businesspeople to Category:Businesspeople in the automobile industry

Nominator's rationale: Duplicates existing Category:Businesspeople in the automobile industry, all the articles in it are car people rather than trucks etc Le Deluge (talk) 23:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge or reverse merge, the two categories have an identical purpose. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:42, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Combine I'll defer to others for the best name but these clearly overlap. - RevelationDirect (talk) 19:28, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Combine / merge, Seem to serve the same purpose. No strong feelings over which should be the preferred name. Eagleash (talk) 20:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge Same scope. Dimadick (talk) 22:55, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge No objections to merging, they have the same scope. I would suggest keeping the name "Automotive Businesspeople" as it makes the category much easier to find, as there are dozens of categories named "Businesspeople in __" to scroll through, which is how a duplicate category was accidentally created. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wildwillmor (talk • contribs) 16:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Reverse merge Automotive businesspeople is just as clear, and less wordy.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: rename. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:26, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Water Polo players at the 1955 Pan American Games to Category:Water polo players at the 1955 Pan American Games

Nominator's rationale: Consistency with other categories (lowercase p). Simeon (talk) 23:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Per WP:C2A and WP:C2C. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:27, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, next time please nominate similar cases in the speedy section. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:45, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:24, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging:

• Category:Mayors of Amersfoort‎ to Category:People from Amersfoort and Category:Mayors in Utrecht (province)
• Category:Mayors of Bunschoten‎ to Category:People from Bunschoten and Category:Mayors in Utrecht (province)
• Category:Mayors of Doorn‎ to Category:People from Doorn and Category:Mayors in Utrecht (province)
• Category:Mayors of IJsselstein to Category:People from IJsselstein and Category:Mayors in Utrecht (province)
• Category:Mayors of Leersum‎ to Category:People from Leersum and Category:Mayors in Utrecht (province)
• Category:Mayors of Stichtse Vecht‎ to Category:People from Stichtse Vecht‎ and Category:Mayors in Utrecht (province)

Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, just one, two or three articles in each of these categories and they are not part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge All For Now These places obviously had more than 5 mayors but most are likely non-notable. No objection to recreating any if they get up to 5+ articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:28, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Upmerge all. These are all too small to be justified.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:47, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. MER-C 19:53, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Suburbs in Colombo District (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer, Colombo District mainly consists of the city of Colombo, so this category can't contain anything else but Category:Suburbs of Colombo. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:39, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per WP:OVERLAPCAT. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:45, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete it overlaps with the other suburbs category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: merge. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Politicians by regional unit of Greece to Category:Greek politicians by place Category:Greek politicians by location

Nominator's rationale: The rest of Category:People by regional unit in Greece is purely geographical. Hard to see why we want to separate out politicians from different levels of geographical divisions. None of the articles in, for example Category:People from Piraeus (regional unit) contains any reference to the regional unit, which of course did not exist when they were born. See discussion below of Category:Politicians by second-level administrative country subdivision

• Propose merging Category:Politicians by administrative region of Greece to Category:Greek politicians by place Category:Greek politicians by location

Nominator's rationale: contains only 2 sub categories. Not enough articles about Greek politicians to populate many more. The rest of Category:People by administrative region in Greece contains only geographical categories. Rathfelder (talk) 21:00, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Both Each of these take two subcategories and pairs them together so the nomination will mean two additional subcats underneath Category:Greek politicians by place Category:Greek politicians by location which is not so large that it needs diffusion. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:51, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: I have updated the target category after it was speedily renamed. – Fayenatic London 13:06, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge an unneeded layer of categorization.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:59, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Clans of Hao (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Newly created category with sinigle entry. The linked article does not mention Hao in the text so unclear what is about. No Clans of Hao article. Hao is a dab page with no entry for a clan noq (talk) 11:38, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep hao is a term mainly used by Meitei to mean the various tribes.But in fact many research finding shows Meitei community itself included among the term hao.

• Delete, overlaps with parent Category:Clans of Meetei. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:24, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: I have nominated parent Category:Clans of Meetei for speedy renaming to Category:Clans of Meitei. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:43, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per WP:OVERLAPCAT with Category:Clans of Meitei. Let's follow the main article name over a disambig page name. - RevelationDirect (talk) 19:31, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Single-article category with little potential for expansion. Dimadick (talk) 22:58, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete an uneeded single entry category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: keep The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:25, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Germanium heterocycles to Category:Organogermanium compounds
• Propose merging Category:Tin heterocycles to Category:Organotin compounds
• Propose merging Category:Antimony heterocycles to Category:Organoantimony compounds
• Propose merging Category:Tellurium heterocycles to Category:Organotellurium compounds
• Propose merging Category:Bismuth heterocycles to Category:Organobismuth compounds

WP:SMALLCAT. It may actually be helpful to recategorize by group. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:00, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• • confusing!: The page Category:Antimony heterocycles says to merge with Category:Organogermanium compounds --kupirijo (talk) 05:48, 14 November 2020 (UTC) I presume this is a typo --kupirijo (talk) 11:49, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • not sure: If we merge then the compounds Stibinin and Stibole will seize to belong to Category:Heterocyclic compounds according to element which is considered to be renamed to Category:Heterocyclic compounds by element. --kupirijo (talk) 05:48, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• It should probably be a dual merge, also to Category:Heterocyclic compounds, per objection of User:Kupirijo. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:06, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment A stray comment has been moved to the body. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:23, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose how about we delete that WP:SMALLCAT instead to avoid all this busy work! For each of these categories there could be many more entries, it is just that no one has got around to writing them yet. Remember that categories always start with a small number of entries and grow from there. Any way there is potential for growth so SMALLCAT is inapplicable. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:36, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose — Category:Heterocyclic compounds by element was just CfD last month, and it instead became a Speedy CfR, so there is support for it. Removing half its subcategories seems counterproductive. I'm not an organic chemist, but it seems there is ample room for future expansion.
  William Allen Simpson (talk) 01:08, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. MER-C 19:53, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Destroyed landmarks in Croatia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: A pure container category, per other recent CSDs "landmark" is subjective and shouldn't be used, and the sub-cats are already properly sub-catted elsewhere. SportingFlyer T·C 20:15, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:49, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete an uneeded layer of categorization.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. MER-C 19:53, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Formerly missing people found dead (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Delete as WP:NONDEF. User:Namiba 20:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not defining, someone missing for a few minutes as in "where are you honey?" and then discovered deceased seems to fit the bill but is probably a common occurrence for those who died unattended. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:55, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A temporary status that is not defining. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:52, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, once people are found dead they are no longer missing, so it is very unlikely they will be remembered as missing as a primary characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:52, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete We do not need to classify people by everything that happens. This is sadly far too common, and not long ter defining.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:22, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There are lots of categories relating to death which are completely superfluous. Very few people are defined by the circumstances of their death. Rathfelder (talk) 19:34, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep In many of the articles covered, people were missing for years or decades, until their remains were covered. They should not be removed from categories concerning missing people. Dimadick (talk) 23:21, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give some examples of articles where you think it's a defining characteristic? In the sample of articles I looked at (e.g. Etika) it isn't. DexDor ^(talk) 06:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Agree that it may be defining in case people were missing for an exceptionally long period. But where would we draw the line? We will run in an WP:ARBITRARYCAT issue with this. A list is a better solution. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:14, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Well to pick at random one case Murder of Rashawn Brazell (so not technically an article on a person at all) shows that Mr. Brazell's dismembered body was found the same month he went missing. So it seems like we have used the guideline that you were officially reported missing and then found dead. Since you can be officially reported missing after only 24-hours in some cases, many of these cases will mainly be thought of as murders, not as missing person cases turned to murders.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:53, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:29, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Convert Category:Animated television series featuring female protagonists to article List of animated television series featuring female protagonists

Nominator's rationale: Listify or Delete: As discussed at this CfD, the use of terms such as protagonist and antagonist has been contentious in the past, to the point that WP:PROTAGONIST was created as a way of addressing original research concerns. Converting this category into a list will allow sources to be provided clearly establishing that the television series belongs as a member of the list. DonIago (talk) 19:36, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no objection to listification is reliable sources tell us this is a notable characteristic. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:56, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and I wonder if a list would not run into the same problem. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as not a defining characteristic. "Featuring" and "protagonist" are original research editor judgment calls and seldom actually sourced or mentioned in the articles. Female characters in principal cast is fairly universal so pointless to use that as criteria. Female character as lead character is generally sourced in credits as first listed and that is likely what was desired for inclusion here. Still so common as to be pointless to categorize. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:47, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this is merging all sorts of unlike things. A list would not be helpful either.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: withdrawn. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Yakuza films to Category:Films about the yakuza

Nominator's rationale: Rename per current convention, to make more clear that this category is for films where the yakuza play a significant role, versus incidental appearances. DonIago (talk) 19:27, 3 December 2020 (UTC) Withdrawing per Dimadick's argument below. DonIago (talk) 02:09, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete another "films about" category without objectively-defined inclusion criteria much less any inkling of what reliable sources tell us that each film merits inclusion. If this is a notable genre, listify it and source it. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:57, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:56, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The main article is called Yakuza film, and defines it a specific genre. Dimadick (talk) 23:24, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• That is a reasonable oppose. I have struck my earlier support. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:01, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. MER-C 19:54, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Poisonous plants (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Whether something is poisonous (can be fatal or extreme irritant to humans) depends upon how it is prepared, the amount consumed, how vulnerable the human is etc. Hence, it's not a good characteristic to categorize by.  In some if the articles in the category (e.g. Agave) there is little/no mention of the plant being poisonous.  Note: there is List of poisonous plants.  See previous CFDs e.g. minerals and fish. DexDor ^(talk) 18:24, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and precedent. Even plants on our everyday table may have toxins that may harm susceptible people. Potatoes come to mind. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:00, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Almost everything is poisonous if taken in sufficient quantity. It's just that the sufficient quantity varies between things. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:18, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Poisonous is subjective, dependent on dose and potentially negated by preparation techiques. Nicotiana tabacum is in the category and is consumed daily by around 1 billion people with essentially no deaths due to acute toxicity (cancer deaths from chronic use are common, but that doesn't seem to be what the category is about). Many culinary herbs could be toxic if consumed in far larger quantities than is typical. Other plants in the category that are commonly consumed with no problems at normal doses (and leaving cancer aside) include: Areca catechu, Boldo, Lablab, Mentha pulegium, Phytolacca americana Pimenta racemosa, Ruta graveolens, Sambucus, Silybum marianum, and Solanum nigrum. Plantdrew (talk) 16:52, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is too species-dependent. Some plants that are relatively safe for humans, such as chocolate, are poisonous to other animals. (The list is specific to humans and domestic animals.) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:29, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this is not really defining to plants, especially because as pointed out in the nomination lots of factors can effect this.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. MER-C 19:54, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Korea Image Awards Winners (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: WP:OCAWARD, no corresponding article for Korea Image Award or similar, no indication of notability and there's no mention of the award in the main text of several of the included articles. Le Deluge (talk) 18:15, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is an overcategorization by award.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:20, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I copied the current category contents right here so no work is lost if anyone wants to start a list article. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:58, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per clear case of WP:OCAWARD. - RevelationDirect (talk) 02:58, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, obvious case of WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:57, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:People of the Russian Empire, etc, but using "from" rather than "of" for historians, geographers, geologists and emigrants per siblings. – Fayenatic London 13:42, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people to Category:Russian Empire people
• Nominator's rationale although Imperial means "connected with an empire", Imperialism has a specific meaning that does not apply here. We have other categories using the proposed form such as Category:Aksumite Empire people, Category:Inca Empire people, Category:Korean Empire people, Category:Latin Empire people, Category:Mongol Empire people and Category:Mughal Empire people. There are some kingdom and republic categories with similar formats. Overall I have to say the whole Category:People by former country tree is a huge mess, but I think the proposed name is way better than what we have. This is a huge tree, but I have tried to tag everything of note. I was going to include everything in this nomination, but that got really long. There are 87 occupation categories, and some have sub-categories. The below is all I got so far.18:02, 3 December 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnpacklambert (talk • contribs)
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people by ethnic or national origin to Category:Russian Empire people by ethnic or national origin
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of African descent to Category:Russian Empire people of African descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian Armenians to Category:Russian Empire Armenians
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Armenian descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Armenian descent (I have doubts that this category is a valid way to categorize people, but that is an issue for another day)
• Note we already have Category:Belarusian people in the Russian Empire, so we are not consistent with the current format
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Chinese descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Chinese descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Czech descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Czech descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Danish descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Danish descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Dutch descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Dutch descent
• We already have Category:Ethnic Germans of the Russian Empire. I am not decided on the past way to rename that.
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of French descent to Category:Russian Empire people of French descent
• rename Category:Imperial Russian people of German descent to Category:Russian Empire people of German descent (I am not sure having this category and the Ethnic Germans of the Russian Empire has been thought out well
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Greek descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Greek descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Hungarian descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Hungarian descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Irish descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Irish descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Italian descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Italian descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Jewish descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Jewish descent (whether this two person category is justified I an mot convinced)
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian Jews to Category:Russian Empire Jews
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian rabbis to Category:Russian Empire rabbis
• Rename Category:Jewish Imperial Russian writers to Category:Russian Empire Jewish writers
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Montenegrin descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Montenegrin descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Serbian descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Serbian descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Spanish descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Spanish descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Swedish descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Swedish descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people of Swiss descent to Category:Russian Empire people of Swiss descent
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian people by occupation to Category:Russian Empire people by occupation
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian academics to Category:Russian Empire academics
• rename Category:Imperial Russian actors to Category:Russian Empire actors
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian historians to Category:Russian Empire historians
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian journalists to Category:Russian Empire journalists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian anatomists to Category:Russian Empire anatomists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian actresses to Category:Russian Empire actressesJohn Pack Lambert (talk) 15:39, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian male actors to Category:Russian Empire male actors.
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian women to Category:Russian Empire women
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian women by occupation to Category:Russian Empire women by occupation
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian writers to Category:Russian Empire writers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian dramatists and playwrights to Category:Russian Empire dramatists and playwrights
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian essayists to Category:Russian Empire essayists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian poets to Category:Russian Empire poets
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian architects to Category:Russian Empire architects
• Added rename Category:Imperial Russian short story writers to Category:Russian Empire short story writers
• Added 'Rename Category:Imperial Russian literary critics to Category:Russian Empire literary critics
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian memoirists to Category:Russian Empire memoirists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian military writers to Category:Russian Empire military writers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian novelists to Category:Russian Empire novelists
• More additions 12-7-2020
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian anthropologists to Category:Russian Empire anthropologists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian translators to Category:Russian Empire translators
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian women writers to Category:Russian Empire women writers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian archaeologists to Category:Russian Empire archaeologists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian art critics to Category:Russian Empire art critics
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian artists to Category:Russian Empire artists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian painters to Category:Russian Empire painters
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian biologists to Category:Russian Empire biologists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian astronomers to Category:Russian Empire astronomers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian aviators to Caegory:Russian empire aviators
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian balloonists to Category:Russian Empire baloonists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian bankers to Category:Russian Empire bankers
• So far that is 57 categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:46, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian botanists to Category:Russian Empire botanists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian sportspeople to Cateogry:Russian Empire sportspeople
  • Note this category was created by the obstructionist after this nomination was made, with no other justification than to make the work to create this nomination even bigger than it was otherwise — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnpacklambert (talk • contribs)
    • That is untrue. I created it to serve as a container category for the many sportspeople categories that you were creating. I named it as I did because I thought it best to wait for the outcome of this discussion before changing it to "Russian Empire". Which is more than can be said for your decision to name all of the subcategories using "Russian Empire". Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian physicians to Category:Russian Empire physicians
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian surgeons to Category:Russian Empire surgeons
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian businesspeople to Category:Russian Empire businesspeople
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian cartographers to Category:Russian Empire cartographers
• I keep adding. This is a juge category tree.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:33, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian chefs to Category:Russian Empire chefs
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian chemists to Category:Russian Empire chemists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian chess players to Category:Russian Empire chess players
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian choreographers to Category:Russian Empire choreographers
• added Rename Category:Imperial Russian civil servants to Category:Russian Empire civil servants
• added Rename Category:Imperial Russian dancers to Category:Russian Empire dancers (I am not convinced we need as fragmented a sub-tree for dancers in the Russian Empire as we have, but that may be an issue for another timeJohn Pack Lambert (talk) 19:33, 7 December 2020 (UTC))[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian male dancers to Category:Russian Empire male dancers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian male ballet dancers to Category:Russian Empire male ballet dancers (combined these two categories have only 18 entries, I am unconvinced we need both, especially since only 1 male dancer seems to not be classified under ballet)
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian ballet dancers to Category:Russian Empire ballet dancers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian ballerinas to Category:Russian Empire ballerinas
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian female dancers to Category:Russian Empire female dancers (again a set of 18 in both categories, with just one not having done ballet, and she was more an opera singer than a dancer)
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian diplomats to Category:Russian Empire diplomats
• OK I am still adding more.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:21, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian economists to Category:Russian Empire economists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian editors to Category:Russian Empire editors
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian engineers to Category:Russian Empire engineers (The two relevants sub-categories are currently nominated for other reasons)
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian ethnographers to Category:Russian Empire ethnographers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian explorers to Category:Russian Empire exploerers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian feminists to Category:Russian Empire feminists
• added Rename Category:Imperial Russian film directors to Category:Russian Empire film directors
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian folklorists to Category:Russian Empire folklorists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian geodesists to Category:Russian Empire geodesists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian geographers to Category:Russian Empire geographers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian geologists to Category:Russian Empire geologists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian inventors to Category:Russian Empire inventors.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian lawyers to Category:Russian Empire lawyersJohn Pack Lambert (talk) 21:11, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian librarians to Category:Russian Empire librarians
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian mathematicians to Category:Russian Empire mathematicians
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian statisticians to Category:Russian Empire statisticians
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian military personnel to Category:Russian Empire military personnel
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian models to Category:Russian Empire models
• added Rename Category:Imperial Russian artists' models to Category:Russian Empire artists' models
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian musicians to Category:Russian Empire musicians
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian composers to Category:Russian Empire composers
• added Rename Category:Imperial Russian conductors (music) to Category:Russian Empire conductors (music)
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian pianists to Category:Russian Empire pianists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian classical pianists to Category:Russian Empire classical pianists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian harpsichordists to Category:Russian Empire harpsichordists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian violinists to Category:Russian Empire violinists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian classical violinists to Category:Russian Empire classical violinists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian singers to Category:Russian Empire singers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian female singers to Category;Russian Empire female singers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian sopranos to Category:Russian Empire sopranos
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian opera singers to Category:Russian Empire opera singers
• Added rename Category:Imperial Russian nurses to Category:Russian Empire nurses
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian orientalists to Category:Russian Empire orientalists
• below are more additions from 12-8-2020John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian educators to Category:Russian Empire educators
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian philanthropists to Category:Russian Empire philanthropists
• Added Reanme Category:Imperial Russian ladies-in-waiting to Category:Russian Empire laddies-in-waiting
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian nobility to Category:Russian Empire nobility
• Added rename Category:Imperial Russian women scientists to Category:Russian Empire woman scientists
• I am about to add more for Dec. 9, 2020.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:22, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian pathologists to Category:Russian Empire pathologists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian philologists to Category:Russian Empire philologists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian philosophers to Category:Russian Empire philosophers
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian physiologists to Category:Russian Empire physiologists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian political scientists to Category:Russian Empire political scientists
• added rename Category:Imperial Russian politicians to Category:Russian Empire politicians
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian politicians by party to Category:Russian Empire politicians by party
• So far that is 119 categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:25, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• More additions on 12-10-2020John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added rename Category:Imperial Russian religious leaders to Category:Russian Empire religious leaders
• Added rename Category:Imperial Russian schoolteachers to Category:Russian Empire schoolteachers (why do we have this category and educators as well. I would try to solve that issue, but to make any headway I would have to nominate every category, and that would just plain be a mess. This one is taking long enough.)
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian scientists to Category:Russian Empire scientists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian secret service personnel to Category:Russian Empire secret service personnel
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian secret service informants to Category:Russian Empire secret service informants
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian Shia clerics to Category:Russian Empire Shia clerics
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian sinologists to Category:Russian Empire sinologists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian socialites to Category:Russian Empire socialites
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian sociologists to Category:Russian Empire sociologists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian theatre directors to Category:Russian Empire theatre directors
• This gets us to 129 categories included in the nomination.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:34, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian theologians to Category:Russian Empire theologians
• Added rename Category:Imperial Russian zoologists to Category:Russian Empire zoologists
• This completes the occupation subcategories. It brings us to 131 categories nominated.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:38, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian people by religion to Category:Russian Empire people by religion
• Comment I know I put in more yesterday, but I guess I lost the edit. This is very frustrating. Here goes more additions.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:30, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian amputees to Category:Russian Empire amputees
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian atheists to Category:Russian Empire atheists
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian Christians to Category:Russian Empire Christians
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian Christian socialists to Category:Russian Empire Christian socialists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian Muslims to Category:Russian Empire Muslims
• That is 137 categories, and we still have over 50 left.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:30, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian people by war to Category:Russian Empire people by war
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian assassins to Category:Russian Empire assassins
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian communists to Category:Russian Empire communists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian Marxists to Category:Russian Empire Marxists
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian murder victims to Category:Russian Empire Murder victims
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian priests to Category:Russian Empire priests
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Category:Russian Empire emigrants (this has lots of subcats). We are now to 144 categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:37, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Andorra to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Andorra
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Argentina to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Argentina
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Australia to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Australia
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to the Austrian Empire to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to the Austrian Empire
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Austria-Hungary to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Austria-Hungary
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Belgium to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Belgium
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Brazil to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Brazil
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Bulgaria to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Bulgaria
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Canada to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Canada
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Chile to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Chile
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to China to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to China
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Cuba to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Cuba
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to India to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to India
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Denmark to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Denmark
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Egypt to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Egypt
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to France to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to France
• Comment This is taking a long time. I probably will need manage to add any more entries until Monday.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:31, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Germany to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Germany
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Greece to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Greece
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Italy to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Italy
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Japan to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Japan
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Mexico to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Mexico
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Monaco to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Monaco
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to the Netherlands to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to the Netherlands
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to New Zealand to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to New Zealand
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Norway to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Norway
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to the Ottoman Empire to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to the Ottoman Empire
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Peru to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Peru
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Romania to Category:Russian Empire emigrant to Romania
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to South Africa to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to South Africa
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Spain to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Spain
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Sweden to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Sweden
• Added rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to Switzerland to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to Switzerland
• Added rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to the United Kingdom to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to the United Kingdom
• Added rename Category:Imperial Russian emigrants to the United States to Category:Russian Empire emigrants to the United States
• Finally we are through the Emigrants category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:34, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian expatriates to Category:Russian Empire expatriates
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian expatriates in Australia to Category:Russian Empire expatriates in Australia
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian expatriates in Austria-Hungary to Category:Russian Empire expatriates in Austria-Hungary (that matches out article Austria-Hungary, part of me wornders if Austro-Hungarian Empire is not a better name, but that would seem to be a broader discussion for another day)
• Added Rename Category:Imperial Russian expatriates in France to Category:Russian Empire expatriates in France
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian expatriates in Germany to Category:Russian Empire expatriates in Germany
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian expatriates in Italy to Category:Russian Empire expatriates in Italy
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian expatriates in Iran to Category:Russian Empire expatriates in Iran
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian expatriates in Mexico to Category:Russian Empire expatriates in Mexico
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian expatriates in Switzerland to Category:Russian Empire expatriates in Switzerland
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian expatriates in the United States to Category:Russian Empire expatriates in the United States
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian monarchists to Category:Russian Empire monarchists
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian socialists to Category:Russian Empire socialists
• Rename Category:Imperial Russian Zionists to Category:Russian Empire Zionists
• That should be it. I think all categories using the Imperial Russian formaition have been nominated.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:31, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename, less ambiguous. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:07, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Also support the ones that were added later. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:24, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I just discovered we also have Category:Austrian Empire people, it was just not under Category:People by former country.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:05, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose unless all of the subcategories are nominated; they have not yet been. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 08:36, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is par for the course obstructionism. There are an insanely high number of categories, probably in excess of 100 all told. It is a tedious process to nominate even one category for renaming. I am trying to nominate everything but there is a huge amount of stuff here.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:11, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not obstructing anything. You are free to nominate as many as you choose, but I am stating my opinion that they should not be changed unless all of them are changed. This is a fairly common opinion that is often expressed in big nominations. Making big changes sometimes requires a large amount of work. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • You are being obstructionist. You are intentially making this category bigger so that you can ide behind your proceduralism to enforce the existing system and make it too hard for any editor to actually change things to the way they ought to be. That is the very definition of obstructionism.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:07, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have no idea what you are talking about. You're certainly not assuming good faith. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 07:28, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Johnpacklambert: I suppose you would not have been satisfied with leaving half of these categories in the old format, would you? So that's basically the same thing that GOF aims for. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:08, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • And to be clear, I support the proposal if all of the categories are nominated. So I'm hardly being "obstructionist". Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. johnpacklambert, the nominator, has created Category:Russian Empire people as a fork and has begun categorizing it with subcategories. Can we hold off on this until we see what form we are going to to use? Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 08:40, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Clearer scope. Dimadick (talk) 23:35, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support As long as whole tree is nominated. SFB 04:52, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I am not nominating any of the military related subsections. That is because the force categories seem to have articles like Imperial Russian Navy. I think that particular set of issues needs to be considered seperately.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Looking at today's Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories, it looks like someone is emptying Imperial Russian categories this week. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:08, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Most if not all of those categories had 1 or 2 entries. I really do not see the point in preserving such small categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:27, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Johnpacklambert, if you disagree with the existence of a category, you should nominate it for deletion, not empty it. And you certainly should not be emptying out "Imperial Russian FOOs" categories and replacing them with "Russian Empire FOOs". Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:23, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Which is not at all what I was doing. I was emptying the people to parent categories because I makes no sense to have 1 or 2 entry by occupation categories for a given nationality. Obstructionists who assume bad faith on the part of others would not at all realize this.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, I found and redirected a number of new "Russian Empire FOOs" categories to the corresponding "Imperial Russian FOOs" categories. You created the new ones and populated them after nominating the "Imperial Russian FOOs" categories, so you can't exactly claim you weren't aware of them. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 07:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, now that JPL has completed the necessary nominations. Good Olfactory is correct, please respect the process. If there were too many, it might have been better to nominate the parent, then work your way down the tree.
  1. In any case, all the others in Category:Former empires in Europe seem to be <FooBarian> Empire, so this is a decent match.
  2. However, there are quite a few that should be merged. Category:Imperial Russian Armenians + Category:Imperial Russian people of Armenian descent. These (and the others) should only be in a combined descent category. And I'm fairly sure those categories need a lot of purging.
  3. Where are the Russians of Orthodox descent? If it's not notable for Orthodox, it's probably not notable for Jews.

  William Allen Simpson (talk) 00:02, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would suggest waiting to make a decision on the two Armenian related categories for a seperate discussion. There is a broader discussion on the issue in progress, and it is clear that some feel in some countries the Citizen of country x+Armenain form works (Lebanon is probably the modern country where there is the strongest argument for it. Likewise the Ottoman Empire, the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union all have strong reason for us to use this form. With historical Armenian areas under the control of the Russian Empire (more so than either the Soviet Union or modern Armenia, some of what was the Russian Empire and mainly Armenian is now in Turkey), even if an Armenian was living in St. Petersburg, Moscow or Kiev, they would still be able to travel home to ancestral areas of pure Armenianess at will. So I think it is the Category:Russian Empire people of Armenian descent we don't need.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Great, please remove all the "descent" categories that should not be currently under consideration here.
      William Allen Simpson (talk) 15:55, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Jewishness is an ethno-religious category, so comparing it to Russian Orthodoxy is just not accurate. Also keep in mind that ERGS rules say that we do not categorize by something that is overwhelmingly common. Thus we would never make a category Category:English people of English descent. I have reservations about Jewish descent, especially applied pre-1900. Pre-1900 the idea people could cease to be religious Jews and still in some sense be Jews was not really accepted. So having a Jewish parent or once Jewish parent while not in any way yourself being Jewish was not really defining at the time. The think is Category:People of Jewish descent is a multi-national category. I think at one time I managed to get it deleted, arguing that for these people the fact that they are just of this descent, and do not in any way fit the designation "Jewish", meant that it was inherently non-defining. However others felt such a need to categorize by it the category came back.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:34, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Russian Orthodoxy is also an ethno-religious category. The main body would normally be Orthodox Catholic, but the Russian Orthodox split themselves. Around here, the Russian Orthodox community actually send their children to a Russian-only speaking school.
      William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm glad there is something we agree upon. Category:People of Jewish descent was deleted in 2007, 2009, and 2011. But let's start here. There is nothing notable about having Jewish ancestors in the Russian Empire. As opposed to actually being a Jewish rabbi.
      William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:07, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't question that as a justified move. However I think to do it you would need to create a seperate nomination to get it done. If I recall correctly there is only one person in that category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:56, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment At present Imperial Russia is a redirect to Russian Empire.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:34, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since 2006 after WP:RM.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support It's an improvement in my book (better scope and wording). Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 05:14, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • As far as I can tell the scope is not meant to be changed at all, although the scope is more clear from the new name.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:48, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Support clearer scope overall and consistency with other categories. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 02:42, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Admin question: there is consensus now to change from using "Imperial" to "Empire", but as so much work has gone into this nomination, can we first check whether to use "Russian Empire people" which is like 7 "Empire" siblings in People by former country (ignoring one newly-created duplicate), or "People of the Russian Empire" which is like 34 "Empire" siblings? – Fayenatic London 10:53, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think "X of the Russian Empire" is the more idiomatic phrasing for these categories, but either outcome is an improvement so happy to support either. SFB 11:08, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Russian Empire people is much better. It is more concise. Plus it is way better when we get to sub-cats. For example "Russian Empire historians" is going to work much better than "Historians of the Russian Empire". The later will make people think this is about what they study instead of the polity they are subjects of.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:40, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• I would not object to either of the toe variants. With historians both are tricky, we might better use "from" in that case. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:24, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "from", rather than "of", would indeed be necessary in the case of historians. "Historians of" is used for the country of interest (see Category:Historians by country), not the country of origin (Category:Historians by nationality).
  • For the other sub-cats, e.g. by descent, "of" has been used for Category:People of the Ottoman Empire by ethnic or national origin. – Fayenatic London 10:42, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment with current polities we can not easily put in denominative forms, we use the form most similar to Russian Empire people. Thus we have Category:New Zealand people not Category:People of New Zealand.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:36, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • With current polities we generally use the demonym "Fooian people"; but with former polities former empires we generally use "People of Foo". – Fayenatic London 10:42, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • That is not really true. It looks like only about half of the categories under Category:People by former country use the format you are suggesting. The other half often use forms similar to what I suggest, or use Fooian people, such as Categorty:Byzantine people, Category:Ancient Athenians, Category:Aztec people and many more. There are over 200 sub-cats of Category:People by former country and nothing even close to uniformity. The longer form would lead to truly unwidely occupation categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:32, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Aha, I mis-remembered the point that I was making. 123 out of 211 use "People of", which is only a little over half, but "People of" is predominant where the former country does not have a single adjective but uses a compound name, e.g. Fooian Empire/ Kingdom/ Republic. – Fayenatic London 10:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• @Johnpacklambert, Marcocapelle, Good Olfactory, Dimadick, Sillyfolkboy, William Allen Simpson, Sadko, and Solavirum: pinging once again, hoping for some decisive input on the choice between "Russian Empire people" and "People of the Russian Empire". – Fayenatic London 19:02, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "People of the Russian Empire" seems to be the standard to match other categories for former states. I would support this. Dimadick (talk) 19:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also support "People of the Russian Empire" as the most idiomatic phrasing. SFB 19:22, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • People of the Russian Empire, and record guideline for compound names of former polities. (My watch on this page had expired, this has taken so bloody long.)
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 19:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am okay with either of the two. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:59, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both seems okay, but "People of the Russian Empire" sounds more right. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 23:23, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would leave this issue to another day – perhaps a broader nomination to address all of the siblings. But either seems to be OK. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:35, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Diseases in the trenches to Category:1910s disease outbreaks

Nominator's rationale: I don't have a strong view on this, but it either needs to be moved into the Category:20th-century disease outbreaks hierarchy, renamed to Category:Diseases associated with warfare or similar - or just deleted as a WP:SMALLCAT. Le Deluge (talk) 17:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Category:Trench warfare per WP:SMALLCAT or else rename to Category:Diseases associated with warfare as a clearer category name. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment -- While both are identified with WWI, neither is specific to it. The fever is a lice-born disease, while the foot was first identified in 1812. If kept, rename to Category:Diseases of trench warfare. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:41, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Trench fever became notable during World War I, but the main article indicates that it was not a new disease. It has been found in the remains of people who lived between the 1st and the 19th century. Would World War I be defining for it? Dimadick (talk) 23:42, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Although possibly best known for WWI these diseases aren't specifically about WW1. Thus, the relationship between the diseases and WW1 should be (just) by normal text/links. Category:Foot diseases etc are sufficient categorization. DexDor ^(talk) 07:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this connection is not defining to the diseases in question in a way that they are worth categorizing by. Nor does it make them a distinct group.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:09, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Politicians by second-level administrative country subdivision to Category:Local politicians

Nominator's rationale: This intermediate category appears only to work for the USA. I cant see why we need to keep Category:County officers in the United States in a third level subcategory. In other places administrative levels dont seem to be used in the same way. Rathfelder (talk) 13:39, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support nom however this can be plainly deleted instead of merged because the content is already in the tree of Category:Local political office-holders by country. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:18, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Plain deletion fine by me. Rathfelder (talk) 19:35, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – in the USA, a "subdivision" refers to a plat of land, usually the division of a section into lots. There are no "country subdivisions"; in political science (or mapping) they'd be called "administrative divisions". And this was done by a subsequently banned user. I'm surprised it wasn't cleaned up years ago.
  William Allen Simpson (talk) 23:47, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: rename. MER-C 15:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Banijay Group to Category:Banijay

Nominator's rationale: Since the completion of Endemol Shine Group in July 2020, Banijay Group has been simplified its name as Banijay. Ridwan97 (talk) 07:06, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support The main article is called Banijay. Dimadick (talk) 23:43, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: rename. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:37, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Hydroelectric power plants in the United States by state to Category:Hydroelectric power stations in the United States by state

Nominator's rationale: Every other type of similar category is "stations" i.e. "Geothermal power stations", "Natural gas-fired power stations", "Oil-fired power stations", master category "Power stations" etc. jp×g 00:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• could each of the U.S. state sub-categories also be nominated at this time? Hmains (talk) 01:44, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Yeah, that seems condign to me. jp×g 21:58, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Question: is it perhaps a matter of WP:ENGVAR? Marcocapelle (talk) 04:58, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I think either is fine in principle, but they shouldn't be inconsistent between categories in the same tree. The only reason I don't propose moving Category:Geothermal power stations in the United States to Category:Geothermal power plants in the United States is because "power stations" seems to be the more predominant variation by far (see Geothermal power station, Fossil fuel power station, List of power stations in Texas, Template:Generating stations in Arizona, etc). jp×g 21:58, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: rename. MER-C 15:04, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Hunter Marine to Category:Hunter Marine boats

Nominator's rationale: If the article Hunter Marine was removed, this category would be categorizing exclusively articles about specific Hunter Marine boat models. I suggest renaming and then removing the parents Category:American boat builders and Category:Yacht building companies. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:40, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:02, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. MER-C 19:54, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Recipients of the Order of Charity (Ottoman Empire)

Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:PERFCAT and WP:OCAWARD)

When prominent female leaders visited the Ottoman Empire, the Order of Charity (Ottoman Empire) was given out as souvenir to commemorate the visit. Wilhelmina of the Netherlands, Alexandra of Denmark and Princess Victoria Louise of Prussia are not remotely defined by this award. There wasn't a list so I created one here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Background In the past, we've deleted similar categories for high ranking visitors here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, another obvious case of WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is an overcategorization by award.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:12, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. MER-C 19:55, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Recipients of the Indira Gandhi Peace Prize

Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD)

The Indira Gandhi Prize is meant to promote world peace which is certainly a worthy cause but the award does not seem defining for Mikhail Gorbachev, Jimmy Carter, Kofi Annan, Doctors Without Borders, Parliamentarians for Global Action or the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Thoe articles mention the award in passing with other honours, if at all but most tellingly the Václav Havel article discusses not winning the Nobel Peace Prize more prominently than actually winning this award. The recipients are already listified here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Background We recently deleted an American peace prize right here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, another case of WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:04, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this is a case of overcategorization by award.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:12, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.