Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 May 1

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) 01:05, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:West Bengal Bharatiya Janata Party politician stubs to Category:Bharatiya Janata Party politician stubs

Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated stub category, with no evidence of approval by Wikiproject Stub sorting. As always, stub categories are not free for just any user to create on a whim -- the minimum bar for the creation of a stub category is 60 articles, so stub categories have to be proposed to the Wikiproject for approval. But there are just 22 articles here, and absolutely no evidence that the creator followed the proper process.
It's worth noting that the stub template has already existed since 2020, and was filing its entries in the target Category:Bharatiya Janata Party politician stubs until being modified in the past week to use this category instead -- and while some Indian states do have their own state-level subcategories of that, they're all over the 60 bar, and many more Indian states don't have their own state-level subcategories of the parent.
To be fair, the undifferentiated {{BJP-politician-stub}} is still on enough people that I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody can find evidence that at least 38 of them can be transferred here to get it over the bar -- but 22 articles isn't enough to warrant a dedicated subcategory here. Bearcat (talk) 15:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:59, 1 May 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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Shearling (band) albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Band albums category created solely to hold a single redirect that doesn't even actually lead to a standalone article about the band that recorded this album, but to a subsection in an article about the predecessor band that the band members were in before forming the band that recorded this album. And further, the album was just released today, so while it may attain sufficient notability in the future to pass WP:NALBUMS, that isn't already a foregone conclusion yet as of right now.
Redirects can be categorized where appropriate and useful, but there's no rule that redirects always have to have categories on them the same way that articles do, so we don't automatically need this just because the redirect exists either.
So no prejudice against recreation in the future if and when the album or the band actually pass WP:NMUSIC, but we don't need this just to hold a single redirect to an ancestor band. Bearcat (talk) 15:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:00, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, debatable notability, also a WP:SMALLCAT with little likelihood of future expansion. Carguychris (talk) 16:51, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Well said. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 03:43, 8 May 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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Stagedoor Manor alumni (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining category for alumni of a youth summer camp. As always, we categorize people by their defining characteristics, not by every possible fact about their lives -- but these people are notable as actors, singers or filmmakers, not as alumni of a youth arts training program per se. Bearcat (talk) 15:23, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend keeping it as a category because the program has so many famous and celebrated alumni, not unlike a university or other prestigious program! Mahalowallow (talk) 01:21, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's not justification for a category. Categories are not just lists, and are not created for just any characteristic you want to create a list of — we categorize people by their defining characteristics. If and when Robert Downey Jr. dies, for example, the headline on his obituary is going to be "Actor Robert Downey Jr. dies", not "Stagedoor Manor alumnus Robert Downey Jr. dies" — so "actor" is a defining characteristic of his notability, while Stagedoor Manor is not. Bearcat (talk) 16:56, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - non-defining. --Altenmann >talk 01:49, 3 May 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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Constantinos Christoforou songs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only two known entries, both of which are redirects, making this category effectively redundant. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 10:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Grk1011 (talk) 13:20, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:02, 1 May 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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Songs with music by Levent Çoker (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only two known entries, both of which are redirects, making this category effectively redundant. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 10:35, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Grk1011 (talk) 13:20, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:03, 1 May 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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Edin-Ådahl songs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only one known entry (which is itself a redirect), making this category essentially redundant. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 10:19, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Grk1011 (talk) 13:20, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:03, 1 May 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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Blond (band) songs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only one known article (which is itself a redirect at present), making this category redundant. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 10:14, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Grk1011 (talk) 13:20, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:03, 1 May 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. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Former counties of Scania (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Two articles and there are no other Former counties of (province of Sweden). The two articles may be merged to Category:History of Scania but are properly categorised in its parent Category:History of Skåne County. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 08:55, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:05, 1 May 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) 01:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Tourist attractions in Scania to Category:Tourist attractions in Skåne County

Nominator's rationale: The only entry here is Category:Castles in Skåne County. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 08:43, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. LibStar (talk) 04:20, 7 May 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) 01:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Association of Southeast Asian Nations templates to Category:ASEAN templates

Nominator's rationale: No idea which cat name should be better, but aren't both having same navigation purposes? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to "ASEAN templates", per ASEAN article title and Category:ASEAN. CMD (talk) 16:03, 2 May 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 as nominated. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:French addiction physicians to Category:Addiction physicians

Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Also merge with Category:French physicians.

Also nominating for merge:

• Category:Kyrgyzstani addiction physicians with Category:Addiction physicians and Category:Kyrgyzstani physicians
• Category:Norwegian addiction physicians to Category:Addiction physicians and Category:Norwegian physicians. LibStar (talk) 06:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Dual merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:07, 1 May 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) 01:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Works set in Mobile, Alabama to Category:Culture of Mobile, Alabama
• Propose merging Category:Works set in Flagstaff, Arizona to Category:Flagstaff, Arizona
• Propose merging Category:Works set in Fayetteville, Arkansas to Category:Culture of Fayetteville, Arkansas
• Propose merging Category:Works set in Fort Smith, Arkansas to Category:Culture of Fort Smith, Arkansas
• Propose merging Category:Works set in Little Rock, Arkansas to Category:Culture of Little Rock, Arkansas
• Propose merging Category:Works set in West Memphis, Arkansas to Category:Culture of West Memphis, Arkansas
• Propose merging Category:Works set in Cupertino, California to Category:Cupertino, California
• Propose merging Category:Works set in Irvine, California to Category:Culture of Irvine, California
• Propose merging Category:Works set in Long Beach, California to Category:Culture of Long Beach, California
• Propose merging Category:Works set in Palo Alto, California to Category:Palo Alto, California

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory each. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: These categories were not tagged; I will do so. If there are no further comments we should be all set to merge :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support trivial redundant layer. --Altenmann >talk 08:38, 1 May 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: keep. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Equity Media Holdings (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Defunct company; stations have been sold Mvcg66b3r (talk) 17:15, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose: Closure of a business is irrelevant to the category's continued usefulness in relation to that company. - Davidships (talk) 19:08, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Davidships's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose: invalid reason. --Altenmann >talk 08:39, 1 May 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: rename to Category:Hydro Tasmania development schemes. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Hydro-Tasmania power development schemes to Category:Hydro Tasmania development schemes

Nominator's rationale: C2D with Hydro Tasmania Ahaohahg (talk) 01:31, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• @Ahaohahg: shouldn't it become Category:Hydro Tasmania power development schemes (with "power")? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:16, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hydro Tasmania develops only power, so the word is redundant, but if it also happen to manufacture fishing rods, we will already have a category for this :-) --Altenmann >talk 08:42, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:39, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support , mathces the name of the business. --Altenmann >talk 08:42, 1 May 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: upmerge/delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:01, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:People of the Hydro-Electric Commission of Tasmania to Category:People of Hydro Tasmania

Nominator's rationale: C2D with Hydro Tasmania Ahaohahg (talk) 01:28, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Just move the article about the book to Category:Hydro Tasmania. It is not a defining characteristic of the other two articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:22, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess you meant Category:Hydro Tasmania. --Altenmann >talk 08:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fixed that. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:09, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Ahaohahg: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 01:32, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:39, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• upmerge/Delete :underpopulated. --Altenmann >talk 08:45, 1 May 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: speedy deleted per G7. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:28, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose splitting Category:Executed Jack the Ripper suspects to Category:Jack the Ripper suspects and Category:Executed suspected serial killers

Nominator's rationale: I don't think that this intersection is defining. It seems to capture an extremely narrow intersection of suspects, cause of death, and the specific crime. ^SMason_Garrison 02:14, 1 May 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.