Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 March 1

March 1

Category:Wu (region)

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is no such thing a “Wu region”, not in the Chinese language, nor in the Chinese cultural conception of regions. What this article and category is referring to is probably the Jiangnan region of eastern China. SigillumVert (talk) 23:48, 1 March 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.

Actors by populated place in Germany by state

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 all. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 04:26, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category layers. 1-3 subcategories each. –Aidan721 (talk) 23:30, 1 March 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:Palnadu district geography stubs

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:59, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is only one transclusion in this stub category. Should it (and/or the template) be deleted? OpalYosutebito (talk) 20:50, 1 March 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.

Actors by populated place in Wales by county

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 all. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 04:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 1-2 subcategories each. Redundant category layer. –Aidan721 (talk) 19:17, 1 March 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.

Actresses by populated place in Scotland by council area

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 and delete. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 04:30, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 subcategory each. Redundant category layer. Merge per WP:NARROW. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:52, 1 March 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.

Actors by populated place in Northern Ireland by county

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 and delete all. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 08:44, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: 1-2 subcategories each. Redundant category layer. Merge per WP:NARROW. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:44, 1 March 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.

Actresses by populated place in England by county

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 all. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 04:33, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary category layer. Only 1-3 subcategories. WP:NARROW. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:25, 1 March 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.


Nationality actresses 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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:01, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: All contain 1-3 subcategories. Redundant category layer. WP:NARROW. For the Mexican category, the subcategories are already categorized under Category:Mexican actresses by state so an additional target is not needed –Aidan721 (talk) 17:46, 1 March 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.

International sports competitions 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: keep. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 02:26, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The defining part of the internationality of its sibling, Category:International sports competitions by country, that there is one host country for the event is not met in this group of categories. They also attract competitions that not match the definition of the parent, to be "for competitions between national teams or representatives, not competitions simply involving individuals from different countries."
It would need some manual overlook as not all Category:International sports competitions in Belgrade fits in Category:International sports competitions hosted by Serbia et cetera. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 17:04, 1 March 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.


Malmö venues

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:01, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:OCVENUE. All Category:Concerts at Malmö Arena are tours. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 17:04, 1 March 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 from Fort Liberty, North Carolina

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:People from Fort Bragg, North Carolina. Merging has the same effect as renaming in this case. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 04:41, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:COMMONNAME, and because the vast majority of these entries are incorrect. First, the relevant facts: The overwhelmingly common historical name for the location is Fort Bragg, as it currently is named and was known for 101 years, from 1922 to 2023. For a brief period from 2023-2025, it was controversially renamed to Fort Liberty by the Biden Administration. Last week, on 14 February 2025, it was formally renamed back to Fort Bragg (though technically, referring to a different namesake). So the current category is pointing to neither the common name nor the official name, but an significantly lesser-used, no-longer-accurate alternative name that was only applicable for less than 5% of the installation's history. Notably, this also means that the vast majority of these entries are not actually "People from Fort Liberty, North Carolina" -- unless they're two years old (spoiler: they're not), they were "People from Fort Bragg, North Carolina" at the relevant time in every case that I spotchecked. I previously had moved the category as this was not expected to be a controversial move; and was partway through manually moving the entries to verify there were no legitimate entrants from someone "from" Fort Liberty during the relevant two year period; however this was reverted by @Timrollpickering: before I completed it, and thus here we are. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 09:30, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as an effective duplicate category. We do not have a separate category under Category:Sri Lankan people for after its 1948 independence but before the country was renamed from Ceylon in 1972. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:56, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, it's lio! | talk | work 16:52, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Timrollpickering: given that we're only here because you reverted my initial move, and the given the lack of input after a couple of weeks, would you have any objection to me simply re-instating the move? It's clearly not controversial if nobody seems to care at this point and it should be quite obvious that the existing category is incorrectly named. Otherwise I fear this may just get relisted over and over again without attention. (Note: that would have the same effect as a Rename or Merge outcome here). ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 01:07, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Swatjester: as the relister, my apologies - see User talk:HKLionel#Relisting. I'll close it now. it's lio! | talk | work 04:40, 9 March 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:Former Stardust Promotion artists

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:Stardust Promotion artists. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 04:42, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is no scheme for former artists by label. Traditionally, music acts are categorized as an artist for whatever label they've been associated without concern of it being in the past or not. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:23, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Not generally helpful to be current. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:35, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, it's lio! | talk | work 16:50, 1 March 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:Apartment buildings in Poland 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: moot. WP:TROUT for Artemis Andromeda for moving this via WP:CUTPASTE while the discussion was ongoing. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:03, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This should be renamed because there's no parent category, and there's no need to have a redudant category layer SMasonGarrison 16:41, 1 March 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:1392 establishments in Korea

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:14th-century establishments in Korea and Category:1392 establishments in Asia. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 04:46, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two articles in it, for a country which does not otherwise have any categories at the year level prior to 1855. This itself was not previously deleted per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 October 26#Years and decades in Korea up to 1800 as it didn't exist at that time (it's a new creation within the past two days) -- but the use of the preformatted {{EstcatCountry}} autogenerated a redlinked Category:1390s establishments in Korea parent that did get deleted in that discussion, and thus cannot legitimately be recreated.
Technically this is also an anachronism, as the country was not called "Korea" yet in 1392, but that's also applicable to the target -- but that would have to be handled with a separate renaming discussion, since the same problem also applies to several other sibling categories. But at the very least, it doesn't aid navigation at all to have a year-specific category here for just two things, if the same country's century-level category isn't nearly large enough to diffuse by individual year in the first place. Bearcat (talk) 16:32, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Aidan721
See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 February 28#Category:Former commanderies of China in Korea.
To my understanding, "Korea" is being used as the name for the region/culture and not the name of a country; this goes for basically all the Korea-related categories I think. Think of things like Category:1st century in Korea; there were numerous independent states and statelets in Korea at the time, with very liquid and porous borders, yet we use the single term "Korea" as a region that encompasses them. seefooddiet (talk) 20:05, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the reason I made a category for specifically 1392 is because that's the year that Joseon was founded, and we know for sure that numerous important things in Korea were founded during that year. I just only added two because it's only been a day that the category's been up; I was planning on adding more later. If you'd like, I can add more things to the category. But I'll hold back for now; if there are other reasons that this category shouldn't exist maybe it's not worth keeping. seefooddiet (talk) 20:09, 1 March 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.

Olympic sports players by year

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:04, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There are currently 964 categories under Category:Summer Olympics competitors by sport and year. The first level of this category contains 49 sub categories, all of which follow the naming scheme of "Olympic (adjective for player) by year". Every single sub category of these 49 sub categories, of which there are 915, follows the naming scheme of "(Adjust for player) at the (year) Summer Olympics", though the sailors category specifically has 177 sub categories that split it up by event but still follow this naming scheme (such as Sailors at the 1964 Summer Olympics – Flying Dutchman).
There are currently 293 categories under Category:Winter Olympics competitors by sport and year. The first level of this category contains 17 sub categories, all of which follow the naming scheme of "Olympic (what you call a person who participates in the sport) by year". Every single sub category of these 49 sub categories, of which there are 276, follows the naming scheme of "(what you call a person who participates in the sport) at the (year) Winter Olympics".
The only exceptions are figure skating and ice hockey, which were briefly / originally featured at the Summer Games. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:24, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, it's lio! | talk | work 15:50, 1 March 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:Bereshit (parashah)

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: rename such that it is also understandable to Christian and other readers what the category is about (WP:NPOV). Note that the far amount of the content of the category is about the content of the Book of Genesis, not about Jewish liturgy. Please keep a redirect though. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:31, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP because these categories are about the way the Weekly Torah portion is called in Judaism, the way they are understood from within the framework in Judaism, and not in Christianity or by any other religion. It in fact helps other religions understand Judaism and its Torah. Christianity, nor any other religion, does not have a "weekly" Torah portion. Thus, this category, like it says at the top of the categories page's, the main article/s for this/these categories is Bereshit (parashah), Noach, Lech-Lecha etc, etc. In addition this category's name has withstood the test of time since 2014, so not sure why now all of a sudden there is this urge to water down and make meaningless these very accurate Weekly Torah portions' names? What next, to change the reality of Judaism's Weekly Torah portions so that Christians and Muslims can "understand" them by making them generic? No one is suggesting that Christian and Islamic divisions of their scriptures be renamed so that Jews and members of other religions can relate to them, so why pick on Judaism's way of categorization? The nominator is requested to drop this nomination that seemingly is being done out of a lack of knowledge as to how the Torah is named and sub-divided by Judaism for thousands of years. IZAK (talk) 00:59, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • So what? Your nomination will change information about important facts about Judaism and will deprive readers and users of understanding how Judaism names and clasifies the Weekly Torah portions. You make no sense. It is like suggesting that "flat Earth" theories determine the way that astronomy views the solar system. This is also not about "liturgy" which is about prayers, rather the Weekly Torah portions are about the naming system that is assigned to the organized weekly Torah (Bible) readings that is practiced by Jews according to Judaism and not according to atheism or Christianity or any other belief system. Your suggestion in effect destroys something about Judaism. IZAK (talk) 12:12, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, it would only destroy something if I would propose to delete the article, which obviously I am not going to do. Bible content is not unique to Judaism, it is available to all mankind. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:27, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. We use "local" names for various subcats within e.g. Category:Religious leaders by religion, and as Izak says it is educational for other readers to become acquainted with these words. We harmonised the spellings from "parsha" to match the article "parashah" a few years ago, but that's the only renaming that was appropriate.
I suggest that the categories might instead usefully be enhanced with information cut down from that at Category:Bereshit (parashah), including scripture references that may be more familiar to outsiders. Perhaps a category header template might be made, with 5 sub-templates based on Weekly_Torah_portion#Table_of_weekly_readings. – Fayenatic London 17:06, 8 March 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:Organ builders of the United Kingdom

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:Organ building companies of the United Kingdom. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 04:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We also have Category:British pipe organ builders. At present the former is mostly used for companies, and the latter is mostly used for people. However, there is some overlap. The one for companies should be renamed to make this clear (it is a subcategory of Category:Musical instrument manufacturing companies of the United Kingdom), and miscategorised members should be recategorised. cagliost (talk) 12:03, 1 March 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 from Hayward, California, 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 all. (non-admin closure) it's lio! | talk | work 04:49, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Subcategory with just one entry.

Also nominating-

All subcategories with 4 or less entries.Lost in Quebec (talk) 11:29, 1 March 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.


6th-century BC deaths by year

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale: merge, mostly 1- or 2-article categories, this is not helpful for navigation. This is a discussion parallel to Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_February_22#Births_by_year_600_BC_-_500, @Aidan721 and Fayenatic london: pinging contributors to that discussion. If this goes ahead then I will also nominate the 6th-century BC year categories, so that we will have a consistent beginning at 500 BC of years and deaths and, dependent on the outcome of the other discussion, of births. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:03, 1 March 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:Mass shootings involving body armor

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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Newly created category without a clear and/or useful purpose. Ed [talk] [OMT] 06:07, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
7kk (talk) 14:08, 1 March 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:Israeli pedologists

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. Category:Pedologists by nationality will also be deleted as it contains only this category. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:48, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duel upmerge this underpopulated category SMasonGarrison 02:07, 1 March 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:Historical sites in Nigeria

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) 04:47, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unless I'm missing something, the two categories have the same scope. Should be a subcategory of Category:Historic sites by country. Pichpich (talk) 00:27, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The categories can be merged. When I searched for a category for historical sites in Nigeria, I couldn’t find one, so I created a new one. At the time, I wasn’t aware of the existing category. I didn’t intend to duplicate it. Thank you for pointing it out. Ridzaina (talk) 09:07, 1 March 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_March_1&oldid=1279709417"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 March 1, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.