Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 May 14

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

The result of the discussion was: split. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 18:01, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Kannywood actors to Category:Male actors in Hausa cinema and Category:Actresses in Hausa cinema, then redirecting to Category:Actors in Hausa cinema

Nominator's rationale: Kannywood redirects to Hausa-language cinema. – Fayenatic London 21:26, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, this is an unnecessary fork. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:29, 15 May 2023 (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:Works about intelligentsia. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 18:05, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Works about intellectuals (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:SUBJECTIVECAT, no clearly defined criteria exist for what constitutes an "intellectual" - car chasm (talk) 21:18, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• We have an article about Intelligentsia so perhaps we can rename the category to Category:Works about intelligentsia. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:11, 15 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 18:06, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Taisha to Category:Taisha-zukuri

Nominator's rationale: rename per article title Taisha-zukuri. Note that Taisha is a disambiguation page. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:06, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose Taisha is a shrine ranking, and Taisha-zukuri is a tangentially related architectural style named after one such shrine with that ranking. We should have an article on Taisha but we currently do not. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 08:00, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:44, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename Per WP:C2D. If more content is created with a potential new main article, open to reconsidering later. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:59, 22 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:41, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Kamo shrines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:OCASSOC, the category is apparently named after the Kamo River but that has little to do with shrines. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:59, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a specific tradition of Kamo Shrines. It is not just a physical location. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 21:21, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• What are your sources and can you possibly write an article about it? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:01, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Here's the article on them Kamo Shrines Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 08:48, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for Now If and when well sourced content appears, we can re-evaluate. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:00, 22 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:39, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Susanoo shrines to Category:Susanoo-no-Mikoto shrines

Nominator's rationale: rename per main article Susanoo-no-Mikoto. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:57, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:44, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per WP:C2D. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:00, 22 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:38, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Gion faith (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to Category:Gion cult
• Propose deleting Category:Gion faith (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Gion festivals (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:Gion shrines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, not a defining characteristic of these articles, Gion is often not mentioned at all. The article Gion is about a part of Kyoto, but the articles are unrelated to that. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:54, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle It is very much a defining characteristic. The deities are worshipped in the gion faith, and the buildings are dedicated to it, the festivals are festivals of the Gion faith. It is a bit strange in its history due to suppression by the Meiji government though. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 21:07, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All of the articles now have clear mentions. One I think was miscategorized but the rest were fairly obvious to someone with familiarity with the Gion faith. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 23:58, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you, what are your sources for these edits? Marcocapelle (talk) 04:58, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I changed the nomination to rename per article title Gion cult. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:58, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per updated nom and WP:C2D. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:01, 22 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:37, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Kōshin faith to Category:Kōshin

Nominator's rationale: rename to align with what should be the main article of this category Kōshin. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:48, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Per WP:C2D. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:02, 22 May 2023 (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. No quorum. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:37, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Sanno faith to Category:Sannō Ichijitsu Shintō

Nominator's rationale: rename to align with what should be the main article of this category Sannō Ichijitsu Shintō. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:47, 14 May 2023 (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 as originally proposed. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:36, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Towers in religion to Category:Religious towers

Nominator's rationale: rename, consistent with parent Category:Religious buildings and structures. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:45, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support The current name seems to suggest the topic is about the meaning/significance of towers in religious thought/practice/theology/symbolism, but it is about the religious functions of actual towers. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 19:47, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Alt Only people are religious; inanimate objects cannot be religious. I think that Category:Religious buildings and structures with domes provides a better direction. What about Category:Towers (religious buildings and structures)? Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:46, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't follow the logic here (why is "religious buildings" fine but not "religious towers"?). At any rate, it clearly is possible for inanimate objects to be "religious" - aside from "religious buildings", the obvious example is "religious books". Furius (talk) 00:24, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. –Aidan721 (talk) 13:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename I'm not sure the target name is the best option, but it's clearer than what we have now. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:03, 22 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:35, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Regional Sōja to Category:Sōja shrines

Nominator's rationale: merge, "regional" is not a defining characteristic of the shrines. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:43, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge more per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT though. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:04, 22 May 2023 (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:Ancient Greek monarchs. bibliomaniac15 04:40, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Ancient Greek rulers to Category:Ancient Greek monarchs

• Re-parent Category:Ancient Greek tyrants to Category:Ancient Greeks by occupation, Category:Heads of state of former countries, Category:Ancient Greek statesmen

Nominator's rationale: WP:C2B/WP:C2C. Follow-up to recently renamed "Category:Ancient Greek women rulers" > Category:Ancient Greek queens regnant, in which female Category:Ancient Greek tyrants were ultimately excluded as non-monarchs. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 19:37, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom and split to Category:Ancient Greek tyrants since many articles are about tyrants. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:19, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Query what about the archons who ruled but did not reign? Laurel Lodged (talk) 18:20, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Agreed that the archons were definitely not "monarchs". It's a bit questionable whether they were "rulers", either, despite the literal meaning of ἄρχειν. The category should move to Category:Ancient Greeks by occupation, Category:Heads of state of former countries, Category:Ancient Greek government, Category:Ancient Greek statesmen (it really ought to be renamed "eponymous archons of Athens", since other city-states (e.g. Delphi) also had eponymous archons...) Furius (talk) 00:01, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Furius So Category:Eponymous archons should get a similar treatment as the Category:Ancient Greek tyrants? That seems like a good idea. Renaming it to Category:Eponymous archons of Athens also seems like a good idea per its parent Category:Ancient Athenians. Thanks for pointing this out. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:57, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm on the fence about whether they belong in the heads of state category. If Athens had a head of state, then I guess it was the archon. However, I would make Category:Ancient Greek tyrants a sub-cat of Category:Ancient Greek monarchs. Tyrants weren't "kings" but they were "monarchs" (the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_April_5#Category:Ancient_Greek_women_rulers, as far as I can see, was specifically focussed on the term "queen", so I don't think it precludes what I'm proposing here). Furius (talk) 22:42, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, the result of that discussion was that female ancient Greek tyrants were excluded from Category:Ancient Greek queens regnant. I would not want to reopen that discussion, I think the result was clear.

  That tyrants and archons qualify for "heads of state" is probably accurate, so re-parenting to Category:Heads of state of former countries is probably a good idea. We currently have no Category:Ancient Greek heads of state, and I am not proposing to create it either, because that might imply that Ancient Greece was a (unified) "state", which of course it wasn't.

  Incidentally, now that I think about it, the re-parenting to Category:Ancient Greek statesmen might lead to a bit of a MOS:GNL issue, as female tyrants will be categorised as "statesmen". Moreover, Category:Statesmen was deleted already in 2009 pernon-neutral term--classify as Category:Politicians or Category:Diplomats). Per WP:C2C parent Category:Greek politicians it should be Category:Ancient Greek politicians. I'll nominate it and its subcategories now. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:00, 21 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:34, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Montreal Maroons (soccer) players (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: No evidence that the soccer club is notable. No article exists, no independent sources could be found. Geregen2 (talk) 16:12, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:SMALLCAT, only 2 articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:29, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 20:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. GiantSnowman 20:12, 16 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:33, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:National Taekwondo teams (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: All entries are federations, all entries are also in Category:National members of World Taekwondo Kaffet i halsen (talk) 15:30, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, this is not a teams sport. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:34, 14 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:05, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• • Propose renaming Category:Monica's Gang to Category:Monica and Friends‎
  • Propose renaming Category:Monica's Gang films‎ to Category:Monica and Friends films‎

Nominator's rationale: To fit with the new comics names

@Marcocapelle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notrealname1234 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename It was boldly renamed without an WP:RM, but that was a year ago so it seems stable. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:07, 22 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:32, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Sexologists by nationality to Category:Sexologists
• Propose merging Category:Argentine sexologists‎ (1 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Argentine people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Australian sexologists‎ (2 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Australian people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Cuban sexologists‎ (2 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Cuban people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Czech sexologists‎ (3 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Czech people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Egyptian sexologists‎ (2 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Egyptian people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Emirati sexologists‎ (1 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Emirati people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Finnish sexologists‎ (2 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Finnish people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Indian sexologists‎ (3 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Indian people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Indonesian sexologists‎ (1 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Indonesian people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Iranian sexologists‎ (2 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Iranian people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Japanese sexologists‎ (1 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Japanese people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:New Zealand sexologists‎ (1 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:New Zealand people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Peruvian sexologists‎ (1 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Peruvian people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Romanian sexologists‎ (2 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Romanian people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Russian sexologists‎ (3 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Russian people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Soviet sexologists‎ (2 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Soviet people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Spanish sexologists‎ (2 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Spanish people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Swedish sexologists‎ (2 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Swedish people in health professions
• Propose merging Category:Taiwanese sexologists‎ (1 P) to Category:Sexologists and Category:Taiwanese people in health professions

Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, only 1-3 articles in each of these categories and not part of a large established tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:03, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. –Aidan721 (talk) 13:54, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge for Now with no objection recreation if any get up to 5+ articles. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. Oculi (talk) 13:50, 22 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:30, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Montreal CPR players (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: No evidence that the club is notable. Existed in the 1920s and 1930s, no article, I could not find independent coverage. Geregen2 (talk) 14:41, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 20:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. GiantSnowman 20:12, 16 May 2023 (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 all per revised proposal Timrollpickering (talk) 16:56, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming 4841 Category:Olympic/Paralympic sportspeople of Foo‎ to Category:Olympic/Paralympic sportspeople for Foo‎
  • Propose renaming Category:Olympic alpine skiers of Albania‎ to Category:Olympic alpine skiers for Albania‎
  • Propose renaming Category:Olympic alpine skiers of Algeria‎ to Category:Olympic alpine skiers for Algeria‎
  • Propose renaming Category:Olympic alpine skiers of Andorra‎ to Category:Olympic alpine skiers for Andorra‎
  • Propose renaming Category:Paralympic alpine skiers of Andorra‎ to Category:Paralympic alpine skiers for Andorra‎

and 4835 similar categories

• • Propose merging Category:Olympic archers of Ireland‎ and Category:Olympic archers of the Republic of Ireland‎ to Category:Olympic archers for Ireland‎

• Propose renaming Category:Olympic competitors from the Russian Empire to Category:Olympic competitors for the Russian Empire
• Propose renaming Category:Olympic competitors for Taiwan‎ to Category:Olympic competitors for Chinese Taipei‎
• Propose renaming Category:Summer Olympics competitors for Taiwan‎ to Category:Summer Olympics competitors for Chinese Taipei‎
• Propose renaming Category:Taiwan at the Olympics‎ to Category:Chinese Taipei at the Olympics‎
• Propose renaming Category:Taiwan at the Summer Olympics‎ to Category:Chinese Taipei at the Summer Olympics‎
• Propose renaming Category:Taiwan at the Summer Olympics by year‎ to Category:Chinese Taipei at the Summer Olympics by year‎
• Propose renaming Category:Taiwan at the Winter Olympics‎ to Category:Chinese Taipei at the Winter Olympics‎
• Propose renaming Category:Taiwan at the Winter Olympics by year‎ to Category:Chinese Taipei at the Winter Olympics by year‎
• Propose renaming Category:Winter Olympics competitors for Taiwan‎ to Category:Winter Olympics competitors for Chinese Taipei‎

Nominator's rationale: C2C Category:Olympic competitors by country categories (e.g. Category:Olympic competitors for Albania‎) and C2D Chinese Taipei at the Olympics

I have not yet found if the of/for-switch, between e.g. Category:Olympic competitors for Albania‎ and Category:Olympic alpine skiers of Albania‎, has been discussed or why it exists. I have only found Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:Olympic competitors by country, a discussion 2005 that established the Category:Olympic competitors for Foo. Mention at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics has not yet rendered any explination.

The reason for for and not from, except for that parent categories are for is that a sportsperson may be from somewhere but represent another entity. For these categories, it is who they represent that is defining.

It doesn’t look to be an preference for of in Wikipedia articles: one "Olympic swimmer of" and 30+ "Olympic swimmer for"; or in web search results: three "Olympic swimmer of Great Britain" -wiki and 1,280 "Olympic swimmer for Great Britain" -wiki

Note: Chinese Taipei at the Olympics had a request to be moved to Taiwan at the Olympics in December 2021 that resulted in no move. Chinese Taipei at the Paralympics and Category:Chinese Taipei at the Paralympics‎ are congruent.

Excluded categories: Category:Olympic competitors as Independent Olympic Participants, Paratriathletes and paracanoeists by country (CfD), Category:Olympic footballers of Russia (CfD), a couple of irregularly named categories (Category:American military Olympians, Category:English Olympic competitors‎, Category:Indigenous Australian Paralympians‎, Category:Paralympic athletes of Italian military sports bodies, Category:Scottish Olympic competitors‎, Category:Scottish Paralympic competitors, Category:Welsh Olympic competitors‎, and Category:Welsh Paralympic competitors).

Kaffet i halsen (talk) 11:37, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose "Chinese Taipei" for consistency. Taiwan is called Taiwan throughout the category tree and "for Chinese Taipei" is not required here as part of a proper name or a standard expression. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:11, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  It looks it hasn't reached the category Category:Chinese Taipei at multi-sport events Kaffet i halsen (talk) 17:05, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment -- I suspect that objections from PRC may mean that Taiwanese competitors have to use that team name. The country calls itself "Republic of China" but WP decided long ago that we should call it Taiwan. Perhaps this should apply here too. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:12, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support "Chinese Taipei" -- also see 2018 Taiwanese referendum#Questions and results. --寒吉 (talk) 06:59, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support "for" but Oppose "Chinese Taipei". The categories for Taiwan participation at the Olympics also cover the period between 1956 and 1976 where Taiwan sent a delegation under the names of either Republic of China, Formosa or Taiwan. "Chinese Taipei" only became a thing starting in 1981. There would probably be little reason to split the categories for Taiwanese participation in the Olympics before or after this date, and "Taiwan" is a better time-independent term for the topic because it is the widely understood common name of the country. Place Clichy (talk) 11:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Taiwan aside, is this proposal really important enough to change nearly 5,000 categories? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:05, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, the main distinction being that not every competitor for a country is necessarily of that country, being eligible through whatever grounds - and that the relevant defining feature for the category is the country being represented; the distinction indicates this focus. I suppose that otherwise, theoretically because it would never stand, someone could try to argue adding multiple "competitor of X" categories to articles of athletes with dual nationality even if they've only represented one country at the Olympics. And since a bot will surely be making the changes, it was probably more effort for me to type this. Kingsif (talk) 03:53, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Update: I have removed the Taiwan/Chinese Taipei part from the nomination to reach consensus. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 10:31, 19 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:29, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Fictional energy swordfighters to Category:Fictional swordfighters

Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:NONDEF. Created by a banned user. The fact that they use an energy sword in particular does not really have a bearing on their characterization. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:45, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Unimportant distinction. Dimadick (talk) 05:59, 15 May 2023 (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:Princes from Kievan Rus'. bibliomaniac15 04:37, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Princes in Rus' to Category:Princes in Kievan Rus'

Nominator's rationale: rename, re-parent to Category:Kievan Rus' people and purge Category:Grand Princes of Moscow. Except the Moscovian rulers (who lived in a completely different time period), these are princes of Kievan Rus'. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Category:9th-century princes in Kievan Rus', Category:Princes of Peresopnitsa, Category:Princes of Torchesk, and Category:Princes of Vyshgorod are WP:SMALLCATs (all 1 P), can we delete/upmerge them while we're at it? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I am afraid this requires a separate nomination. By the way, one could argue that Category:9th-century princes in Kievan Rus' is a case of the smallcat exception rule. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:44, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Ok I'll wait until all the Kievan Rus' CfRs are done because the current situation is complex. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:16, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom. Laurel Lodged (talk) 06:58, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support — dust is settling.
  William Allen Simpson (talk) 06:45, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• FYI I've done a proposal for a new category tree for People from Kievan Rus', in which this category plays an important role, please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 April 22#Category:Nobles of Kievan Rus. I've tagged all of you and two others there already. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:10, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Also purge Category:Princes of Tver and Vladimir the Bold under the understanding that Kievan Rus' ceased to exist in 1240. The Principality of Tver was not established until 1246, and Vladimir the Bold was born in 1353. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 00:15, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Alt rename to Category:Princes from Kievan Rus' per WP:C2C, since the parent has been renamed to Category:People from Kievan Rus' after nom suggested re-parenting it to Category:Kievan Rus' people, see "Kievan Rus' people" > "People from Kievan Rus'". Earlier today I also nominated renaming Category:Kievan Rus' princesses to Category:Princesses from Kievan Rus', and nom @Marcocapelle supported that move as well, so perhaps we should revise this nomination now? "from" is really a better preposition than "in" in this case, I think, and is firmly supported by many recent precedents. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:11, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• To me, "in" sounds more natural here, but I do not have a big issue with "from" either. That applies likewise to princesses insofar that is meant to refer to spouses of ruling princes. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Laurel Lodged @William Allen Simpson given the recent renaming of the parent and my CfR of the closely related category Category:Kievan Rus' princesses to Category:Princesses from Kievan Rus' which has been supported by nom Marcocapelle, you two might also want to reconsider your vote. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:50, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that the nom has been modified from the original.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 06:36, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Alt rename to "from" is OK with me.
  William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:59, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:21, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Alt Rename to from, this sounds the clearest. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:09, 22 May 2023 (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: no consensus. bibliomaniac15 04:38, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Medieval Islamic world to Category:Islam in the Middle Ages

Nominator's rationale: WP:C2C per parent Category:Religion in the Middle Ages and per sibling Category:Christianity in the Middle Ages (see 2018 rename precedent). It already has the century categories as children (Category:7th-century Islam‎ to Category:15th-century Islam‎). The September 2022 move to the current name has caused numerous problems (see the recent discussion). Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:00, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@William Allen Simpson did I nominate it properly this time? I'll just do Islam for now, we can always do Hinduism and Judaism as a follow-up, I don't want to over-complicate things. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:02, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support — as a first step. This is not a former country or a set of countries or a "world". Caused considerable confusion. Agree on over-complication. KISS.
  William Allen Simpson (talk) 13:05, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks! Should I ping the other users involved with the previous CfD? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Fayenatic london, Laurel Lodged, Marcocapelle, Orientls, Peterkingiron, and RevelationDirect: still active users from earlier discussions. The 2022 rename to "world" nominator was a sockpuppet....
William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not his only sock... Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose, this is a completely different tree than Category:Christianity in the Middle Ages which is limited to history of a topic, namely history of a religion. Category:Medieval Islamic world in contrast has a much broader scope: it contains the history of a large cultural region, a civilization if you wish; it is not limited to any topic, and in fact it contains very little about the history of Islam in a narrower sense. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:03, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Category:Medieval Islam had exactly the same Category:Religion in the Middle Ages tree and scope as Category:Christianity in the Middle Ages from 2011 until 2020. Then, Al-Andalusi began his spree of creating Foo in the medieval Islamic world cats, and that sockpuppet Privybst on 1 September 2022 nominated it to be renamed to Category:Medieval Islamic world. You facilitated that on 22 October 2022 by adding Category:Medieval civilizations (a category which you on 29 October 2022 nominated for deletion and manual merging to Category:Medieval Islamic world), while https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Medieval_Islamic_world&diff=next&oldid=1117646744 Al-Andalusi on 27 October 2022 removed parent Category:Religion in the Middle Ages. And so on. It was removed from the tree it belonged in.

  Meanwhile, all the "civilizations" categories that are created and added by various people keep getting nominated and deleted as inappropriate or as recreations of previous deleted categories.

  I don't know why there are all these seemingly futile attempts from September 2022 to February 2023 to put this category in all these inappropriate "civilizations" categories that then get deleted, but I suggest we stop it, and put it back in the Category:Religion in the Middle Ages tree where it belongs, with an appropriate WP:C2C name. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:40, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• It has never been restricted to religious content in the first place, that is exactly why Category:Medieval Islam was and is not a good name for it. We might want to try creating a new Category:Medieval Islam as a subcategory strictly focusing on the equivalent of what in Christianity is sometimes called "church history". It may be populated with a subcategory of medieval Islamic religious scholars, a subcategory of their works and maybe a subcategory of medieval religious movements. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Marcocapelle It has never been restricted to religious content in the first place How do you know that? All its Foo in the medieval Islamic world subcats were not created by Al-Andalusi until 2020-2022.

  And while it's difficult to verify what the category was like in its early days (because it only shows current subcats and items), I can show that Category:Medieval Islam was created on 18 November 2011 by User:Dbachmann, was given only two parents, namely Category:Religion in the Middle Ages and Category:History of Islam, and the following items were put into it by Dbachmann that day, before he moved on to other topics:

  • Category:Abbasid Caliphate (arguably appropriate, is a former Islamic monarchy)
  • Category:Umayyad Caliphate (arguably appropriate, is a former Islamic monarchy)
  • Category:Rashidun Caliphate (arguably appropriate, is a former Islamic monarchy)
  • Category:Medieval Arabs killed in battle (arguably inappropriate; you wouldn't put, say, Category:Medieval Welsh killed in battle in Category:Christianity in the Middle Ages either)
  • Category:Early Muslim conquests (arguably appropriate, has to do with religion-driven military expansion)

  So unless you think it's appropriate to put something like Category:Medieval Arabs killed in battle or Category:Medieval Welsh killed in battle in the Category:Religion in the Middle Ages tree (which you didn't, you personally removed it in 2016!), I would suggest it has been restricted to religious content in the first place (except 1 miscategorisation that you personally corrected; I find that a really funny coincidence). Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 17:46, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • With the list of subcategories that were in it from the beginning you merely confirm what I said before, that the category has never been restricted to religious content in the first place. Everything is very "arguable" when you look at it from a historian of religion's point of view. For example Category:Carolingian Empire is not in the tree of Category:Christianity in the Middle Ages and likewise no Islamic country belongs in Category:Medieval Islam, as country categories cover politics, culture, society, in short they cover everything of the country, and not just religion. On the other hand Category:Christianity in the Middle Ages covers specific religious subjects, as it is supposed to do, like church councils and theological controversies, but Islam does not have something similar to church councils and has way fewer (well-known) theological controversies. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:32, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    By that logic, we should rename its parent Category:History of Islam to Category:History of the Islamic world. It's not really about religion, just a catch-all for anything vaguely associated with Islam. Rather than purging miscategories items and subcats, we just abandon the scope of a category. We add a slew of geographic generalisations, which pan-Islamists will love, and will implicitly virtually erase the existence of millions of non-Muslims from areas across three continents from all of history. (Oh, and let's try and categorise it as some sort of "civilization"; I don't know which yet, but hopefully we'll find one that sticks eventually). Why? Because Islam does not have something similar to church councils and has way fewer (well-known) theological controversies. /sarcasm. I'm sorry, but I don't think these are valid excuses for abandoning our policies on categorisation. I'm a bit frustrated that you do not appear to see just how many issues that these categorisations are causing (even though you have seen and corrected some of them already). Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:13, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    • I am just asking for consistency. Category:Christianity in the Middle Ages is limited to religion and the organization of religion. The nominated category is not (and is nevertheless useful). Marcocapelle (talk) 18:26, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Sarcasm aside, Islam has many denominations, seminaries, and councils. Alawite, Shia, Sunni, and Sufi have had many wars, perhaps more than Roman Catholic and Protestant. Sunni alone has 4 major schools: Hanafi, Shafii, Maliki, and Hanbali, the latter spawning the Wahhabi and Salafi movements in Saudi Arabia.
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:07, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    • While there are of course differences in Islam, these can often be explained in the articles about denominations, schools and movements. What I was talking about is historical events with stand-alone notability that merit an article. That is how categories get populated. For Islam we have very few. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:26, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 06:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep -- This much wider than just Islam as a religion, but refers to a whole culture or civilisation, and some of it is about people who were not Muslims. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2023 (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. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 21:20, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Eintracht Vancouver players (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: No evidence that the club is notable. Played in an amateur league 50+ years ago. No independent coverage could be found. Geregen2 (talk) 00:31, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Club were Canadian national champions in 1971 (winners of the Challenge Trophy) and had Canadian national team players playing for it at the time, two of whom are in this category. There are numerous references to the club in contemporaneous newspapers (the club are also referred to as "Vancouver Eintracht"). Cheers, Number 57 11:04, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 20:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per N57, 4 entries (for now) is enough. GiantSnowman 20:12, 16 May 2023 (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.