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.
Support per CFDS C2D (match parent article name). GiantSnowman 11:27, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 11:28, 4 February 2019 (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.
Support per CFDS C2D (match parent article name). GiantSnowman 11:27, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 11:28, 4 February 2019 (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.
Support per CFDS C2D (match parent article name). GiantSnowman 11:28, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 11:28, 4 February 2019 (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:Public health doctors by nationality[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.
Nominator's rationale: One of the parent categories is Category:People in public health. There isn't a category of Public health doctors, and it is no longer true that all the people who do this sort of work are doctors. The situation varies from country to country. I'm not proposing to rename all the country categories, but I want to be able to categorize those who are not doctors by nationality. Rathfelder (talk) 23:00, 3 February 2019 (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:12th-century Catholic Church Councils[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. – FayenaticLondon 09:48, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Johnbod (talk) 19:18, 9 February 2019 (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 (WP:NAC). DexDor(talk) 21:32, 14 February 2019 (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.
Nominator's rationale:delete per WP:NONDEF, "Germanic" is not a defining characteristic of e.g. Austria or Denmark, nor was it a defining characteristic of e.g. the British Empire or the Swedish Empire, nor is it a defining characteristic of the culture of these countries. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:15, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Germanic countries and territories - Germanic heritage is the defining characteristic, according to scholarly sources, of several European countries. One Europe, Many Nations: A Historical Dictionary of European National Groups by James Minahan states: "The Germans are an ancient ethnic group, the basic stock in the composition of the peoples of Germany, Scandinavia, Austria, Switzerland, northern Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, north and central France, lowland Scotland, and England."[2] Minahan classifies Denmark and Austria (and several other countries) as Germanic nations.[3]
There is no denial that British or Austrian or Swedish people are Germanic-speaking peoples, the critical point is that e.g. the British Empire is not defined as a Germanic Empire. Please check WP:DEFINING. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:27, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As the claim by the nominator regarding defining characteristics is contradicted by scholarly sources, the suggested deletions cannot possibly be a benefit to Wikipedia. Krakkos (talk) 23:15, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is a confusing comment because this nomination is not about Category:Germanic peoples. Let's for example take Austria. This country is not defined as a Germanic country in [11] or in [12] or in [13] or in [14]. An oppose vote should contain links in which Austria is defined as a Germanic country in a description of Austria (rather than in a description of Germanic). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:38, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The sources that you cite mention Germanic not in the lede of the description of Austria, therefore is not a defining characteristic. Please note that we do not categorize by just any characteristic. About Bantu countries etc., while that is an WP:OSE argument, it is likely that you are right that the same may apply to other ethnolinguistic groups. I will dig into that further. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:21, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Collier's Encyclopedia states in its lead that "Austria is a Germanic country".[24] Please do dig. If being a "Bantu country" is a defining characteristic of South Africa, then being a Germanic country is surely a defining characteristic of Iceland. Krakkos (talk) 23:37, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It was merely mentioned in a subsection, not as a defining characteristic of the country. Besides it wouldn't surprise me if Bantu country is not a defining characteristic of South Africa either. (What about the Koisan?) Marcocapelle (talk) 18:49, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom (it's overcategorization to categorize countries under peoples) and if not deleted purge of most/all subcategories as there's no way that every article in Category:Geography of Sweden belongs in a Germanic category (and this sort of categorization often causes category loops). DexDor(talk) 19:26, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep "Germanic countries" - Google Scholar gives 3520 results for the term "germanic countries". That's good enough for me. Blomsterhagens (talk) 01:09, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion is not about notability but about definingness, i.e. whether this characteristic usually appears as one of the key characteristics of a country. It doesn't. Please check WP:DEFINING. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:03, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - It is evident that we do have WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but that is not the guideline to keep it. We also do not have Category:Semitic countries or Category:Semitic Empires. However, it looks somewhat useful categorization on cultural grounds to me. Maybe more opinions are required to get it clear.GreyShark (dibra) 07:01, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This has survived for years as a LINGUISTIC category, but of course it is User:Krakkos who came along one day and decided to make it ETHNIC. If kept it should be returned to the old definition. No big objection then. Is there no end to the harm this editor does? Johnbod (talk) 19:22, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Which neatly shows the nonsense involved in any ethnic classification on this scale (look at the genetic studies, and indeed the histories of the countries). So delete the countries one, as not needed, and the empires one. The other is a twig on a larger, & probably diseased, tree, & the whole tree should be taken in one go. Johnbod (talk) 19:57, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete countries and territories. What about countries with overlapping histories? Switzerland's simultaneously Germanic and Romance. France speaks a Romance language, but its indigenous people are Germanic. Many countries speak English despite having only a small percentage of people of English, German, etc. descent (consider Demographics of Jamaica#Ethnic groups or Demographics of Hong Kong for a couple of extreme examples), and the English-speaking USA has a massive percentage of individuals (including me) who are partly descended from Germanic people and partly from non-Germanic. Keep culture; you nominated a meta-category but not the subcategories, which makes no sense unless you're doing a trial nomination and planning to nominate the subcategories later. Unsure about empires. Nyttend (talk) 12:42, 16 February 2019 (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.
Nominator's rationale:merge per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only one article in this category, and with only some 100 articles about monasteries all over Russia a subcategorization scheme by medium-sized cities is not very meaningful. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:28, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into parents. I don't think a monastery is a church. Oculi (talk) 16:17, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I also don't think so, but usually Christian monasteries contain a church. In this case the Vvedensky Cathedral and Vladimirskaya Church. Churches seems a better target than the more general Category:Buildings and structures in Kazan. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:25, 3 February 2019 (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:University of Florida College of Law alumni[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:procedural close, nominator has been moved nomination to CFDS. (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 22:34, 7 February 2019 (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.
Nominator's rationale: "Aspirants" is supposed to be plural as there's many of them. Howard the Duck (talk) 07:03, 3 February 2019 (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.
Not entirely the wrong place. According to WP:CFD, the scope is categories and stub types. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:28, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No transclusions, and not proposed at WP:WSS/P, let alone authorised there. @Anomalous+0: Stub templates have been discussed at CFD since WP:SFD was closed down several years ago. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:42, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Also incorrectly named by stub naming conventions (stub templates don't have spaces in their names, they have hyphens) and redlinked (no parent category). Seems to have been created specifically for use by a WikiProject by someone who doesn't realise that individual projects use talk page banners for stubbing purposes (and a lot more besides). Grutness...wha? 14:47, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
...all of which has no bearing on whether a stub template exists. In fact, as I pointed out above, a talk page template would be far more useful for an established WikiProject (see here). Grutness...wha? 00:06, 5 February 2019 (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.
