Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 February 22

February 22

Category:People from Asbury Park, New Jersey, by occupation

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:52, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Subcategory with just one entry.

Also propose merging

Subcategory with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 23:18, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge per nom, although Category:People from Asbury Park, New Jersey, by occupation meanwhile has 3 entries it still is a redundant category layer, even more so because the target does not have any other subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:46, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Zoos, aquaria, botanical gardens, and arboreta in Brittany

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). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:52, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Zoos, aquaria, botanical gardens, and arboreta in Brittany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Misguided catchall category that's trying to sweep across several different classes of thing. We do not have any established scheme of categorizing zoos, aquaria, botanical gardens and arboreta together in one-stop-shopping cross-categories -- we categorize zoos on their own as zoos, aquaria on their own as aquaria, botanical gardens on their own as botanical gardens and arboreta on their own as arboreta, and do not bunch those four classes of things together into merged "Zoos, aquaria, botanical gardens, and arboreta" categories. Bearcat (talk) 22:31, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:People associated with GLAAD

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 March 2#Category:People associated with GLAAD

Category:Kudrivka

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). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:54, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Eponymous category for a small town (pop. just 838, according to its article) without enough spinoff content to need an eponymous category. As always, every town does not automatically get its own set of dedicated town-specific categories as a matter of course -- the subcategories here were all created to overcategorize just one individual person, which isn't enough people to justify any of them, but without them the only things left in the eponymous category are the eponym itself and one football club, which isn't enough content to justify it either. Bearcat (talk) 22:04, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


Category:Greek supercentenarians

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:54, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There's only on person in this category. Upmerge for now. They're already in the Greek men centenarians category SMasonGarrison 21:39, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Harvard defunct schools

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge to Category:Defunct private universities and colleges in Massachusetts and Category:Harvard University schools (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:55, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Wozal (talk) 21:25, 22 February 2025 (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.


17th-century disestablishments in Vietnam

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:55, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge sparsely-populated categories. Fayenatic London 20:25, 22 February 2025 (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.

More family categories needing "family"

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: mass rename. Beland (talk) 01:14, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We've renamed nearly all of the subcategories of Category:Families to make sure they had "family" after the name. These are among the only ones left without that word. Most have articles like Nelipić family but a few (like Lamoignon) don't. I think we should standardize the categories nonetheless. Mike Selinker (talk) 17:55, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Wikipedians who identify as a Princesses

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). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:56, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Fails WP:USERCAT for lacking any discernible collaborative function. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:54, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
okay :( Bunny Plushie (talk) 18:02, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Documentary film editors

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 March 2#Category:Documentary film editors

Courts and tribunals (dis)established (12th-15th centuries)

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/delete. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:58, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Up to at least the end of the 15th century, there are only 1-2 articles per year. Diffusing centuries by decade is still not useful at this stage either. WP:NARROW/WP:OCYEAR. –Aidan721 (talk) 14:35, 22 February 2025 (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.


Births by year 600 BC - 500

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 March 6#Births by year 600 BC - 500

English artists by populated place

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:00, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge,redundant category layer with only one or two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:39, 22 February 2025 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_February_22&oldid=1282539604"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 February 22, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.