Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 June 24

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 24[edit]

Category:People from Ashburnham and Penhurst[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 July 31#Category:People from Ashburnham and Penhurst

Category:Poltava National Technical University faculty[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) JBchrch talk 14:23, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, currently only one article which is already in several other faculty categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:43, 24 June 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.

Architecture by country and style[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 July 31#Architecture by country and style

Architecture by country and period[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 all (option 1). (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:36, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: in line with the CFD above, either Option 1 as listed above, to create consistency with the parent e.g. Category:Architecture of the United States;
or Option 2: as above but use "in" rather than "of", e.g. Category:Architecture in the United States by century, because this would also match the sub-categories e.g. Category:18th-century architecture in the United States‎. – Fayenatic London 18:42, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, because meanwhile denonyms are mainly used for people (nationality). Marcocapelle (talk) 19:36, 24 June 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.

People from Ukraine by former raions[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 19:11, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
more categories nominated
Nominator's rationale:. Raions of Ukraine are the second-level administrative divisions of Ukraine, this is a tree of people by the former raions in Ukraine that were in place until 2020. We might recategorize all people by the new raions that were kept or estabished in that reform, but I do not think that is very necessary and besides it would lead to a huge amount of work, so the proposal is to just merge to first-level administrative divisions. Note that the importance of raions has been greatly reduced in the reform of 2020 and the number of articles per raion is often relatively small. In addition, this proposal does not touch the categorization of people by populated place, so it will only impact people in rural areas putting them in larger regions. At WikiProject Ukraine there was little response and no opposition when this proposal was announced. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:34, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly makes sense to me. Ymblanter (talk) 12:33, 24 June 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:Stars 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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:43, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Seems redundant. It is the only sub-category of Category:Star types and appears to serve no function. It was created in 2018, and prior to that, its members were just members of Category:Star types. I propose to get rid of it and return all of its members back to Category:Star types. Lithopsian (talk) 15:03, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Notes: (1) this should have been proposed as a merge rather than deletion. (2) The parent category currently holds only generic articles on types of star, whereas the nominated category holds sub-cats of stars by type. I concur that in other hierarchies, this distinction has been abandoned, i.e. there are precedents for such a merge. (3) If merged, follow-up work should be done to merge the interwiki categories that have been copied from English Wikipedia, see d:Q6864552 and d:Q54811253 – ping me, I am willing. – Fayenatic London 10:47, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is a container of categories conforming to particular types of star, and it is useful for it to be separate from the parent category which contains articles on actual start types.--Mvqr (talk) 13:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 06:01, 24 June 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:Micrococcineae[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 July 31#Category:Micrococcineae

Category:Micrococcineae stubs[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 both. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 18:45, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to parent, as it only contains one stub page. If not merged, rename to Category:Micrococcaceae stubs per the above CFD. – Fayenatic London 19:54, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Sort of. I say delete it. Since the suborder Micrococcineae is no longer in common use there is no need for the stub going forward. And Micrococcaceae isn't large enough to merit its own stub. Ninjatacoshell (talk) 03:50, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the above editor has merged the only member article into the suggested target,[1] so deletion is now the same as merging. I have added the template to the nomination for deletion, which I should have done in the first place. – Fayenatic London 07:48, 26 June 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.