Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 July 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< July 23 July 25 >

July 24[edit]

Category:Films about Prime Ministers[edit]

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: I find consensus to rename all but Category:Films about Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom. There is no consensus on that one (WP:NPASR). -- Tavix (talk) 21:41, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Correct capitalisation (and consistency with parent category). DexDor (talk) 21:06, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per correct English grammar. Oculi (talk) 22:00, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose -- This is NOT correct orthography. Prime Minister is an office and requires capitals as a compound noun. Peterkingiron (talk) 10:08, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Would you also capitalize the roles in, for example, "Films about Cabinet Ministers", "Films about Police Officers", "Films about Window Cleaners" ...? DexDor (talk) 16:07, 4 August 2016 (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 featured picture candidates[edit]

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. -- Tavix (talk) 21:48, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: That a file was once a candidate for (Wikipedia) featured picture status doesn't appear to be an important characteristic of that file. I've been unable to find a process that uses this category (it's not mentioned at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, note: the category has no text and no talk page). Note: This contains a mix of file pages and file talk pages (most/all of which appear to have been tagged in 2007-2008). DexDor (talk) 20:48, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is some usefulness in being able to see that an image was nominated before in the event that you desire to re-nominate it. For images hosted at WP, okay, fine, you can see the fact that it was previously nominated in the page history, but for images hosted at Commons, that's usually a problem - Commons file pages either need to have a category or if they are completely blank they need to be deleted - failing to do so populates Special:UncategorizedFiles with things other than licensing problems or page-blanking vandalism to fix. Years ago when we created this category, it was done so for this reason - previously the failed FPC nominations of Commons images were just being blanked, so we had a bunch of blank image pages populating Special:UncategorizedFiles. If the page is going to exist, it needs to be categorized. --B (talk) 10:29, 25 July 2016 (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:Play School (Australian TV series) presenters[edit]

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. -- Tavix (talk) 21:56, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: We do not categorize people by the televisions shows or films that they have appeared in, per WP:PERFCAT. Upmerge to Category:Children's television presenters and Category:Australian television presenters (if applicable). Tassedethe (talk) 18:52, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Potential keep but Purge -- There may be a distinction to be drawn between staff presenters, who present over a significant period and those who present once or occasionally. WP:PERFCAT certainly applies to the latter. If occasional presenters are primarily actors/actresses, who undertake a guest performance on TV they should not be in the category at all. The headnote needs to make clear that the category is limited to regular presenters. Peterkingiron (talk) 10:14, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. In addition, the article Play School (Australian TV series) already lists all presenters. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:36, 28 August 2016 (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:Terrorist incidents attributed to jihadist groups in India[edit]

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:03, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary layer of categorization. ~ Rob13Talk 18:25, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support This category only contains a single subcategory and no articles. Too small to be useful. Dimadick (talk) 13:49, 29 July 2016 (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:Military operations of the Iraqi Civil War by type[edit]

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:08, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Both of these categories have only one page in them, and it's WP:CRYSTAL to assume the war will develop in such a way that there will be more. Right now, the list articles such as Use of chemical weapons in the Iraqi Civil War seem more likely to be developed. ~ Rob13Talk 18:21, 24 July 2016 (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:Hunter S. Thompson characters[edit]

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:12, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only a single article here, WP:SMALLCAT. ~ Rob13Talk 18:16, 24 July 2016 (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:La Comédie humaine characters[edit]

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:14, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT; there's unlikely to be much potential for growth in specifically La Comedie, but there's more potential for growth if upmerged to the author level. The resulting category would have 4 pages in it. ~ Rob13Talk 18:14, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for Now This seems like too narrow of a breakdown given the current article count. No objection to revisiting though if the article count grows to 5 or more.RevelationDirect (talk) 01:31, 26 July 2016 (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:Images of Gardens and Landscape design[edit]

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:51, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category contains just 2 files - both of which would fit in the B&S category (and are candidates for moving to Commons). Note: the 3 parent article categories (e.g. Category:Gardens) each have a link to Commons which is where readers looking for images on a particular topic should be directed. If not deleted then rename to remove the capitals. DexDor (talk) 18:10, 24 July 2016 (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:Persecution of Kurds by ISIL[edit]

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:21, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary layer of categorization. It's also not clear that "battles" should be categorized under "persecution", so upmerging isn't appropriate. It's also a heavy POV slant to categorize ISIL under a "by country" category. ~ Rob13Talk 18:09, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think that this category could be populated but it currently is as nom points out merely a layer. I think that nom raises two other good questions: (1) are battles "persecution", which I think is a debatable contention on which consensus might be achieved - certain slaughters of civilians by the military of another state could be viewed as both a battle and a persecution (just think of the "battle" of Little Big Horn, and others where the natives were on the losing end), of course reasonable minds could differ; and (2) is ISIL a "country" - normally self-declared unrecognized countries are treated differently here (we have lots of examples: Category:Presidents of Biafra, Category:Presidents of Abkhazia‎, Category:Presidents of Northern Cyprus are all under Category:Presidents by country; but ISIS and the Confederate States of America aren't.) Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:02, 25 July 2016 (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:Cetaceans of Thailand[edit]

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. – Fayenatic London 21:32, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is the only category specifically categorizing cetaceans (whales etc) by a country they are found off the coast of (apart from Australia) and it contains articles such as False killer whale where the text makes no mention of Thailand and the map shows it's found near many countries. Note: there is a list. It's better to categorize cetaceans by which oceans/seas they are found in (like saltwater fish). Note: Should this CFD result in delete I intend to also remove cetaceans from other by-country categories (e.g. from Category:Fauna of Iran) and possibly to add category text making clear that cetaceans are excluded from such categories. DexDor (talk) 16:29, 24 July 2016 (UTC) Corrected DexDor (talk) 21:01, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- None of these are specifically Thai. Most seem to travel through most oceans. Accordingly, a split even by ocean probably has little point. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:06, 24 July 2016 (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:Prime ministers[edit]

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) SSTflyer 08:32, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: In line with most similar categories Rathfelder (talk) 16:01, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per correct English grammar. Oculi (talk) 21:59, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm quite happy with the reverse processs, but there are lot more articles of the form Prime Ministers of Foo. Rathfelder (talk) 09:35, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- The proposed capitalisation is in fact Correct. "Prime Minister" is an office. This means that it is a compound noun (not adjective + noun), so that each word requires capitals. In the same way Barack obama is not president of the United states; he is President. Peterkingiron (talk) 10:04, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prime Minister is an office. Prime ministers is not an office and shouldn't be capitalised. This was a similar discussion about archbishops. Oculi (talk) 23:00, 4 August 2016 (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:Prime Minister of Australia[edit]

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. -- Tavix (talk) 16:20, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: title of the category is misleading. Rathfelder (talk) 15:24, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support to match its headnote. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:08, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - usage in the country - 'the office' as such is not referred to in general usage or any public media in the last 50 years JarrahTree 10:10, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:NONDEF, many articles are hardly more than a case of namesharing. In Category:Prime Ministers of Australia a "see also" note can be written to refer to the current other two subcats of this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:48, 28 August 2016 (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:Female foeticide and infanticide[edit]

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, without opposition. -- Tavix (talk) 16:36, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming:
Nominator's rationale: While I acknowledge this important issue must be visible, I fear the current categorization doesn't work well. Given that there is not a single main article covering these particular types of sex selection, it becomes clear that two out of at least four distinct types are lumped together, while unduly excluding sex selection using natural methods and assisted reproductive technology‎.
While in terms of sexism, all four practices are roughly comparable, otherwise ethically, legally and procedurally, the four types (natural methods, selective implantation, Sex-selective abortion ("foeticide") and infanticide) are widely considered distinct practices, without clear evidence of two of them being significantly closer to each related than the others.
I therefore propose renaming the parent category to Category:Female infanticide, which after dispersing non-related content would still contain at least four specific articles. The two child China- and India-related subcategories should however be renamed to equally cover all practices of Category:Sex selection. Further subcategorization may be introduced whenever there's sufficient specific content. --PanchoS (talk) 13:00, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We do have main article at Female foeticide in India. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:43, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
... and Female infanticide in India. --PanchoS (talk) 09:54, 26 July 2016 (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:Wrestling at the Commonwealth Games navigational boxes[edit]

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 into both suggested categories. -- Tavix (talk) 16:09, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT; a single navbox in this category and it's unlikely to expand. ~ Rob13Talk 09:05, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It should also be in the category Category:Commonwealth Games sports navigational boxes (many of which have one or two entries) Hugo999 (talk) 05:24, 25 July 2016 (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:Anambra State law[edit]

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. -- Tavix (talk) 22:17, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Pointless layer of categorization. The single subcategory is already appropriately categorized under Category:Nigerian lawyers. ~ Rob13Talk 08:50, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Nigeria has a federal structure and a federal legal system. The category structure should reflect that, and en.wp's growing coverage of Nigerian law means that this category does have a good prospect of being more heavily populated, so WP:SMALLCAT does not apply. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:02, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge this and Category:Anambra State lawyers to Category:Nigerian lawyers. The sole content of the tree is two bio-articles on people who have held office nationally (for example as Speaker). The second item should be "lawyers from Anambra State". No objection to re-creation, if it can be populated. Does Nigeria have a separate bar for each state? I am dubious. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for Now The two lawyer articles are a weak basis for the category which seems too narrow for now. No objection to reviewing if 5 or so direct articles appear, as BHG anticipates. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:33, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Reasonable growth rules suggest that this category and related ones can be reasonably expected to grow. Coverage of Nigeria in Wikipedia is on the rise.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:21, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Th fact that the decision in Nigeria on whether to use sharia is done on a state by state basis makes such categories very logical.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:24, 28 August 2016 (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:Nigerian case law[edit]

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. -- Tavix (talk) 16:05, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT issues. This will likely eventually grow, but I don't see that happening soon. It's also dubious whether the single page in this category even belongs there, as the article doesn't lay out how it created any form of case law. ~ Rob13Talk 08:49, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There is a long standing problem that in practice lawsuits, court cases and case law are used interchangeably and there has been reluctance to collapse those trees because, in theory, there are differences. I lean very slightly for keeping a court cases category for each country (under some name) but I'll defer to others with stronger opinions. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:37, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, currently we have a tree of about 30 countries, that is far from complete, so it doesn't harm if one more country will not be in the tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:58, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Case law is a well defined sub-section of law, and for any country with over 150 million inhabitants that uses a system that creates case law this categorization makes sense.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:23, 28 August 2016 (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:Lagos State law[edit]

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, with removal of Category:Lagos State House of Assembly. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:07, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category just seems unnecessary. Going subcategory by subcategory:
  1. Category:Lagos State courts is nominated below for WP:SMALLCAT issues.
  2. Category:Lagos State House of Assembly belongs more in the politics/government category trees than law itself.
  3. Category:Lagos State lawyers are already within the Category:Nigerian law tree via Category:Nigerian lawyers.
  4. Category:Law enforcement in Lagos State is similarly already in Category:Law enforcement in Nigeria and it may also have SMALLCAT issues given how many of layers of categorization exist for such few articles (6 total articles within 4 layers of categorization just to get to the 9-article Category:People murdered in Lagos).

Given the poor state of the overall tree and its apparent redundancy, I just don't see this as useful categorization. ~ Rob13Talk 08:45, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. Nigeria has a federal structure and a federal legal system. The category structure should reflect that, and en.wp's growing coverage of Nigerian law means that this category does have a good prospect of being more heavily populated, so WP:SMALLCAT does not apply.
    I do agree that the House of Assembly probably doesn't belong here, but otherwise this category is fine. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:05, 24 July 2016 (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:Lagos State courts[edit]

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 all three parent categories, which includes Category:State courts of Nigeria. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:42, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT and unlikely to get bigger anytime soon. ~ Rob13Talk 08:41, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as proposed. I am neutral (for now) on whether to merge, but if it is to be merged, then it should be merged to all 3 parents, rather than just one of them. I also suggest that instead of dumping these articles Category:Courts in Nigeria, the target should be a new Category:State courts of Nigeria, which would be a viable category even if populated only by existing articles. That maintains the distinction between federal and state courts. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:52, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support BHG. WE would not merge the state court of Texas with US Federal courts; nor in Nigeria. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:18, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alternative Merge per BHG's non-vote/suggestion. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:39, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, in Nigeria of today, there are courts at the federal level and there courts at the state level. Every state has its own judiciary, consisting of judges and courts. This can be found in the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. In Rivers State for example, there are about 9 different courts including the state's high court. They are called subnational courts. Stanleytux (talk) 06:40, 26 July 2016 (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:Rivers State courts[edit]

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 all three parent categories, which includes Category:State courts of Nigeria. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:47, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT and unlikely to get bigger anytime soon. ~ Rob13Talk 08:40, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, in Nigeria of today, there are courts at the federal level and there courts at the state level. Every state has its own judiciary, consisting of judges and courts. This can be found in the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. They are called subnational courts. Stanleytux (talk) 09:24, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as proposed. I am neutral (for now) on whether to merge, but if it is to be merged, then it should be merged to all 3 parents, rather than just one of them. I also suggest that instead of dumping these articles Category:Courts in Nigeria, the target should be a new Category:State courts of Nigeria, which would be a viable category even if populated only by existing articles. That maintains the distinction between federal and state courts. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:53, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support BHG. WE would not merge the state court of Texas with US Federal courts; nor in Nigeria. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:17, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alternative Merge per BHG's non-vote/suggestion. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:39, 26 July 2016 (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:Sex industry researchers and activists[edit]

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. -- Tavix (talk) 22:13, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: What do Category:Sex worker activists have in common with Category:Organizations that combat human trafficking? This one is poorly defined, borderline WP:OCASSOC and doesn't seem to be particularly helpful. Child categories are sufficiently categorized anyway, so this may be simply deleted, unless someone comes up with a better proposal. PanchoS (talk) 06:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete (assuming nom is correct that no upmerging is necessary). This is the only "researchers and activists" category in wp and causes incorrect categorization. Note: Somehow this has lasted since 2007. DexDor (talk) 16:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and possibly rename. First, I want to take the nominator to task for starting off with an unhelpful and fairly kneejerk statement "What do Sex worker activists have in common with Organizations that combat human trafficking‎?" The answer is that the two are very often on opposite side the same issue, notably, controversies around "sex trafficking" and the decriminalization of prostitution. The category was intended as a an inclusionary one for those on all sides of the prostitution and pornography debate, including those in political activism and academic research. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 18:56, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename into Category:Sex industry activists and purge. Nominator is correct that this is a case of WP:OCASSOC but we can also solve this problem by making the category less inclusive, by removing organizations and researchers. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:31, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are three subcategories of activists here. Not an awful lot, so the category may be (partially) upmerged to its parents per WP:SMALLCAT. One parent needs to be renamed, by the way, but that is for a next nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:32, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete researchers and activists are two distinct groups, no reason to merge them in one category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that by deleting we will lose the connection between the different activists. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:51, 28 August 2016 (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:Health and medical activists[edit]

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. There's clear consensus to merge these categories, but not necessarily which way they should be merged. I'm going to default to the majority here, and enact both proposals since the discussion has been stale for more than a month. -- Tavix (talk) 15:58, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Redundant category containing a single article. PanchoS (talk) 06:28, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Medical activism is a subtype of health activism. --PanchoS (talk) 07:24, 1 August 2016 (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/2016_July_24&oldid=1086105657"