Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 March 26

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) 05:08, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Gold Coast, Queensland in fiction to Category:Culture of Gold Coast, Queensland

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:12, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge as per nom. LibStar (talk) 04:27, 3 April 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.

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) 04:22, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Television shows set in Argentina by city to Category:Television shows set in Argentina and Category:Television shows by city of setting
• Propose merging Category:Television shows set in Thailand by city to Category:Television shows set in Thailand and Category:Television shows by city of setting
• Propose merging Category:Television shows set in Venezuela by city to Category:Television shows set in Venezuela and Category:Television shows by city of setting

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:02, 26 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.

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) 04:22, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Swedish military personnel by location (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary layer – three categories are also children of the fourth. Category:Swedish military personnel by locationCategory:Swedish military personnel by populated place needs to add Category:Swedish military personnel as a parent. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 17:40, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Redundant category. Is the other one even necessary?Lost in Quebec (talk) 20:33, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and re-parent Category:Swedish military personnel by populated place per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:04, 26 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.

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) 05:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Chile in fiction by city to Category:Categories by city in Chile
• Propose merging Category:Venezuela in fiction by city to Category:Categories by city in Venezuela

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:55, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:23, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Category:Venezuela in fiction by city is empty. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:11, 4 April 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.

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. Thorough discussion; unlikely a WP:RELIST would achieve anything productive. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 21:03, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Dinosaurs of the United States to Category:Dinosaurs of North America
• Propose merging Category:Dinosaurs of Canada to Category:Dinosaurs of North America

Nominator's rationale: merge, anachronistic category, the United States did not exist yet. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:01, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose It's specifically talking about the United States region of North America. I don't think people are dumb enough to believe that the United States was around in prehistoric times, but neither was the continent as we know it in some cases, so "Dinosaurs of North America" would be equally as bad under your logic. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:48, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - These should be done by geographic region, and not by polity. - jc37 18:56, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment And toss in Category:Dinosaurs of Canada. too? We all know that dinosaurs didn't cross national boundaries without their passports. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:00, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Fair enough. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:08, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose As said elsewhere, all geographic regions of the modern day are anachronistic to fauna from over 75 million years ago. Dinosaurs of Pangaea is hardly a useful description given that *every dinosaur* that lived in the Triassic lived on Pangaea. North America didn't even exist until after all non-avian dinosaurs were extinct. There is also a double standard here, as modern animals also do not respect geopolitical boundaries. So Category:Birds of the United States is equally problematic. IJReid ^{{{T - C - D - R}}} 02:01, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Fair point that the continents are anachronistic as well. Then we may just as well delete geographic categories for dinosaurs entirely. Dinosaurs have already been categorized by geological age, that may suffice. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:06, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• I don't think that categorising by (modern-named) continents is a problem for these. It is well-described in lots of sources what parts of (also modern-named) Pangaea, each of the parts of the (modern-named) continents is. But I'll agree that "continent" (and perhaps "sub-continent", like the Indian subcontinent, or Siberia (continent)) is probably as far as we should go for these. - jc37 16:03, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That said, I wouldn't oppose deletion of all "Dinosaurs by location/geography cats", for the reasons noted above. - jc37 16:14, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  There does happen to be primary/tertiary sources that use "by location" categorization or organization for dinosaurs, so I don't think it is as simple as our interpretations here regarding usability. The Dinosauria (1990, 2004, and in press) has hundreds of pages dedicated to organizing by location, with a Continent -> Country -> Formation approach. "Canadian dinosaurs" by Matthew (1920) is one of the first popular-audience papers on dinosaurs. Multiple chapters in Hadrosaurs (2014) are dedicated to hadrosaurs of Europe, South America, and Mexico. By location categorization is a useful method, and probably just as if not more importantly, used in primary literature. Believing modern geopolitical boundaries misrepresent dinosaurs goes directly *against* published studies that organize or interpret them in the exact way applied here. IJReid ^{{{T - C - D - R}}} 17:04, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You know what? You've convinced me. Not from your comments about sourcing - those just reinforce that this topic could be an interesting list article. But from your other comment above: "Dinosaurs of Pangaea is hardly a useful description given that *every dinosaur* that lived in the Triassic lived on Pangaea." - Which suggests that every category - regardless of continent - would have the exact same membership. So categorising dinosaurs by location is pointless. Which brings us back around to deleting all of these categories. - jc37 00:05, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• And Category:Dinosaurs of Mexico was just created, too. Soon, we'll have "Dinosaurs of Lativa". Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:02, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  There's no need to be inflammatory about it, let me also introduce you to Category:Dinosaurs of South Africa, Category:Dinosaurs of Madagascar, Category:Dinosaurs of China, Category:Dinosaurs of Mongolia, Category:Dinosaurs of Germany, Category:Dinosaurs of Romania, Category:Dinosaurs of the United Kingdom, Category:Dinosaurs of Australia, Category:Dinosaurs of Argentina, Category:Dinosaurs of Brazil, and let's not forget Category:Dinosaurs of North America, Category:Dinosaurs of South America, Category:Dinosaurs of Africa, Category:Dinosaurs of Asia, Category:Dinosaurs of Oceania, Category:Dinosaurs of Antarctica, Category:Dinosaurs of Europe, Category:Dinosaurs of India and Madagascar, Category:Dinosaurs by continent. We can throw in all the geographic subcategories of Category:Mesozoic dinosaurs as well (these categories require separate discussion as they are very narrow intersection categories, but thats immaterial if all the geographic categories are to be deleted anyways):

  Mesozoic dinosaurs

  Mesozoic dinosaurs of Africa

  Mesozoic dinosaurs of Asia

  Mesozoic dinosaurs of Australia

  Mesozoic dinosaurs of Europe

  Mesozoic dinosaurs of North America

  Mesozoic dinosaurs of South America

  Mesozoic birds

  Some of these categories are a decade old, some were created recently to make a consistent threshold for categorization. No articles would be made for Latvia because no dinosaurs have been found there. Though there is a Category:Birds in Wales if you want to start expelling other human-centric methods of organizing by location. Because we all know that a great ecological wall prevents birds of Wales from flying into Category:Birds in England.

  If a standard is going to be created here where animals cannot be categorized by their modern location, then such a standard should be applied evenly without bias. This extends beyond just "Dinosaurs of" categories. It should include all extinct animals at a minimum, and on a pragmatic level all life that does not confine itself to human borders. And if there is not going to be a standard created here to lead to other mass deletions by the same justification, then these categories should remain. Maybe all of them need to be moved to "Dinosaurs in" similar to the "Paleontology in" categories or "Birds in" categories, even though that wording changes the category from a set to a topic. IJReid ^{{{T - C - D - R}}} 03:26, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Per above and the fact that some people want to look for dinosaurs from specific countries. Lavalizard101 (talk) 11:41, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Being "from a country" means that you reside there. Birds do - do dinosaurs? - jc37 23:35, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  From meaning: "indicating the source or provenance of someone or something." from a country doesn't mean residing there, it just mean its the provenance, given fossils have provenance, dinosaurs from country makes sense. Lavalizard101 (talk) 09:07, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Interesting, thank you.

  wikt:from - It looks like you are applying definition #1, and I was applying definition #3. I think both interpretations are possible, which makes me wonder if the source of contention in this discussion is ambiguity in naming. Perhaps we should come up with a better standard, per WP:PRECISION. - jc37 15:46, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose, the home territories and passage of dinosaurs through land areas is an applicable subject. Major categories of dinosaurs by land area (continents, major countries) all work for categorization purposes and should be kept. Randy Kryn (talk) 06:11, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  How would you define a "major" country? I ask in light of WP:ARBITRARYCAT AND WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. - jc37 23:35, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - this should be done by continent base rather than country base --Irvin calicut (talk) 07:32, 3 April 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.

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) 04:23, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Ethiopian microbiologists to Category:Microbiologists

Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Also merge with Category:Ethiopian biologists.

Also propose merging: Category:Palestinian microbiologists with Category:Microbiologists and Category:Ethiopian biologistsCategory:Palestinian biologists. LibStar (talk) 04:28, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Presumably the latter to be merged to Category:Palestinian biologists rather than to Category:Ethiopian biologists. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:06, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you. I have made a correction now. LibStar (talk) 02:04, 27 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.

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) 04:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Micronesian explorers of the Pacific to Category:Explorers of the Pacific

Nominator's rationale: only member of the category Anagumang isn't defined as being Micronesian ^SMason_Garrison 03:17, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. The article still remains in Category:People from Yap State which probably is as good as it can get. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:14, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Devopam (talk) 04:18, 27 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.

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) 04:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Scottish explorers of the Pacific to Category:British explorers of the Pacific and Category:Scottish explorers

Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. underpoplated category ^SMason_Garrison 03:03, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:15, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Devopam (talk) 04:18, 27 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.

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) 04:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Mission mission stations in Ongandjera to Category:Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Mission mission stations in Ovamboland

Nominator's rationale: underpopulated category with only one page in it ^SMason_Garrison 03:00, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. There is no Category:Ongandjera to merge to. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:17, 26 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.

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) 04:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Samoan people by century and occupation to Category:Samoan people by occupation

Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. this category is redudant ^SMason_Garrison 02:08, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:18, 26 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.

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) 04:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:People from Silat al-Harithiya to Category:People from Jenin Governorate
• Propose merging Category:People from Sarta to Category:People from Salfit Governorate
• Propose merging Category:People from Deir Ballut to Category:People from Salfit Governorate
• Propose merging Category:People from Rafat, Salfit to Category:People from Salfit Governorate
• Propose merging Category:People from Yasuf to Category:People from Salfit Governorate

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. Each of these categories is a village, and only has 1 person in it. ^SMason_Garrison 01:03, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison Merge per nominator but then why do you oppose merging here[1] when most of the nominees, for instance Category:Entertainers from Richmond, Indiana, have just one entry? Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:51, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:19, 26 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.

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) 04:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:National Teaching Fellows (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining ^SMason_Garrison 00:16, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:20, 26 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.

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) 04:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Finnish bacteriologists to Category:Bacteriologists

Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Also merge with Category:Finnish microbiologists

Also propose merging:

• Category:Hungarian bacteriologists with Category:Bacteriologists and Category:Hungarian microbiologists
• Category:Iranian bacteriologists with Category:Bacteriologists and Category:Iranian microbiologists
• Category:Israeli bacteriologists with Category:Bacteriologists and Category:Israeli microbiologists
• Category:Jamaican bacteriologists with Category:Bacteriologists and Category:Jamaican microbiologists
• Category:Moldovan bacteriologists with Category:Bacteriologists
• Category:Portuguese bacteriologists with Category:Bacteriologists and Category:Portuguese microbiologists
• Category:South African bacteriologists with Category:Bacteriologists and Category:South African microbiologists
• Category:Trinidad and Tobago bacteriologists with Category:Bacteriologists
• Category:South African bacteriologists with Category:Bacteriologists and Category:South African microbiologists
• Category:Vietnamese bacteriologists with Category:Bacteriologists LibStar (talk) 00:03, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Support per nom. ^SMason_Garrison 01:05, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:21, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nominator.Lost in Quebec (talk) 13:15, 26 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.