Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< April 1 April 3 >

April 2[edit]

Category:Fairtex Fight Promotion[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 (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 05:05, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category subject page deleted. Also was created by a banned or blocked user. Shadess (talk) 21:13, 2 April 2022 (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.

Azerbaijani descent[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 May 25#Azerbaijani descent

Category:African Americans in World War II[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) Marcocapelle (talk) 18:11, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: As per parent cats Gjs238 (talk) 19:36, 2 April 2022 (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:African Americans in World War I[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) Marcocapelle (talk) 18:14, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: As per parent cats Gjs238 (talk) 19:35, 2 April 2022 (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.

Daughters and sons of monarchs[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 all. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 16:06, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:OVERLAPCAT, this is an unnecessary fork. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:25, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support generally but a Japanese imperial daughter has recently ceased to be royal through marriage to a commoner; and Category:Princes is slightly ambiguous as the ruler of Monaco is a Prince: possibly keep in that case. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:08, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose since prince and princess are not exactly synonymous with being the children of a monarch. For instance, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie are not the daughters of a monarch, but rather the granddaughters of one. Векочел (talk) 22:59, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not exactly synonymous is correct, they are close enough that a distinction is not helpful at all. They are all royalty, women, and not the spouse of a monarch. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Category:Daughters of monarchs as above and because the daughters of Roman monarchs are not described as princesses (if anything it was wives). Although "close enough" may well be a reason for leaving things alone I don't think it justifies a change in categorisation towards being less descriptive. Princess covers all sorts of shapes and sizes of folk. I haven't looked at the other nominations because there is far too much unnecessary churn in categorisations to take time over. Thincat (talk) 09:39, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support On second thought, this does appear to be a fork. As for recategorising Category:Sons of monarchs and Category:Daughters of monarchs, these can simply be placed under Category:Children of monarchs, and it's perfectly acceptable for one category to contain hundreds of pages (many of them already do). Векочел (talk) 03:37, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • (as nom) Ok I notice there are some valid objections against merging the top categories right now, so I will strike these. The objections do not apply to the above country subcategories though because, e.g., the United Kingdom is a monarchy with princes and princesses to begin with. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:02, 14 April 2022 (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:American award winners[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 10#Category:American award winners

Template:US-physiologist-stub[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. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 15:55, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This goes with Category:American physiologist stub. Per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting#US-physiologist-stub / American physiologist stub, this template/category pair was created without prior approval, and the category is also misnamed - it should have been Category:American physiologist stubs if approved (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Naming conventions#Stub categories). The cat has only four member articles, rather than the 60 that we ask for; and despite asking for more, five weeks later there has been no suggestion of further potential candiates for this stub template. Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:39, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. This is the quintessential reason about why it's the best idea to go through WP:WPSS/P before creating stub cats. Curbon7 (talk) 20:22, 2 April 2022 (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/2022_April_2&oldid=1089780672"