Change disambiguator from "genus" to "butterfly" or "moth"[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:C2D The main articles have been renamed to match with the disambiguator used by most others in the series. Changing the disambiguators to match article titles. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 22:53, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Category names should match article titles (and (moth)/(butterfly) are more consistently used disambiguators than (genus) for articles on Lepidoptera genera). Plantdrew (talk) 01:02, 1 May 2020 (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: not a clear consensus, so split to a new sub-cat as suggested by some. Without the current category, I am not sure how the new sub-cat should be parented. – FayenaticLondon18:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This category groups people associated with the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, where Soviet Russia left WWI and negotiated a separate treaty with the Central Powers. The problem is that the diplomats and national leaders involved in that negotiation were, well, diplomats and national leaders who also did other stuff. Anastasia Bitsenko is an outlier who does seem defined by this treaty but none of the others do, including Prince Leopold of Bavaria and Leon Trotsky. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:33, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep So the people associated with it also did other stuff - so what? It's a treaty of global significance. It's useful to have all the stuff in 1 place. Laurel Lodged (talk) 08:20, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but it may need purging. This was a highly important treaty, so that being one of it negotiators is highly defining, but I suspect that some of the people were only vaguely associated (and should thus be purged). Perhaps rename to Category:Treaty of Brest-Litovsk negotiators. PERFCAT is about avoiding clutter where the issue is a brief passing event. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:49, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (supporting my response above). We do not need to create a separate people category, only rename as all the articles are bio-articles, except one main article on the treaty. Oculi's proposal would leave us with a category consisting just of a main article and a subcat; such categories regularly get deleted, commonly as eponymous. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (upmerging non-bio articles if necessary). This is in effect a "people associated with" category that is non-defining e.g. for Prince Leopold of Bavaria. Anybody interested in topics (including people) related to the treaty should look at links (especially if there's a navbox) in the article about the treaty. DexDor(talk)17:47, 1 May 2020 (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.
Delete an "about" category, without an object view of how much "about" the subject must be and what reliable sources tell us it's at least that much. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:27, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That might be a reason to delete all "about" categories, however it is not a reason to remove content from those trees at random just because they happen to be discussed at CFD. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:02, 25 April 2020 (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:Documentaries about same-sex marriage[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 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.
Must be renamed as Metro is a common abbreviation for metropolitan. In its present form, it is likely to pick up irrelevant entries by mistake. The precedent for this is Birmingham. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:53, 25 April 2020 (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:Czech-speaking territorial units in Croatia[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:delete, this category concerns two municipalities, Daruvar with 11.000 people of which 20% Czech-speaking, and Koncanica with 2.000 people of which half Czech-speaking. Both municipalities are mentioned in the list article Minority languages of Croatia. The two other articles in the category are villages in the municipality of Daruvar. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:19, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hungarian and Italian have the same problem as Czech: small places and even in within those places there is only a small minority of people speaking the language. I wouldn't consider it a defining characteristic. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:28, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-defining, non-standard and non-permanent. Villages etc are sufficiently categorized by populated-places-in-<county> categories. DexDor(talk)09:00, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Both communities, especially Daruvar, are reasonably well known in Croatia for their Czech minority status. There is however the SMALLCAT problem. I'm inclined to support Laurel Lodged's proposal. DaßWölf11:27, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: No real consensus at the moment. More discussion needs to take place about whether the category is perhaps a WP:NOTDEFININGorWP:SMALLCAT situation, or whether the alt merge is the best course of action. It is very likely that the outcome of this case will set a certain precedent in terms of "minority-language areas," and this needs to be further discussed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac1518:42, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge "Category:Czech-speaking Territorial Units of Croatia" into the article titled "Minority Languages in Croatia". This will make a lot more sense. --JTZegers (talk) 19:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete we generally don't categorize places by what language is spoken there (by how many? when? does it have official status?) In how many categories would we find London, New York, or nearly any major world city. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:28, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- Nice as it might be to have such a category, it will never make a viable category. This is probably referring to an indigenous language, which in London or New York could only be English, so that I do not accept the validity of the last point made. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:17, 25 April 2020 (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 - actually, assuming the template's goes this could simply be deleted as a G8 (category populated by redirected or deleted template) Grutness...wha?04:40, 25 April 2020 (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 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.
Oppose these were not American military personnel by state; these folks pre-dated the concept of "state" and the formation of the United States. If they wore the uniform of Great Britain they should say so; if that was of British colonial troops in Massachusetts, that's what it should be titled, but the merger proposed is ahistoric. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:31, 24 April 2020 (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.
Infobox television season tracking categories[edit]
Category:Television series with two or more creators[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.
Delete I think having multiple creators is much more common than having a sole creator credited. Television is a collaborative medium. Dimadick (talk) 19:43, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not relevant to the discussion but just had to comment, "creator" is not "people involved with the creation of the series", it's actually a specific credit. It's usually 1 or 2, hardly ever many. --Gonnym (talk) 14:43, 24 April 2020 (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.
Keep It seems rather pedantic to argue that someone isn't associated with a town if they grew up on an adjacent farm or some other immediate area.--User:Namiba18:08, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Namiba: You bring up immediate area. Somebody lives in 120 block of Pond Path in Centereach New York. What is across the street? Lake Grove New York. That person moves to Lighthouse Point, Florida 2900 block of 53rd street, that is less than two blocks away from Deerfield Beach. Oh and Lighthouse Point is the same zip code as Pompano Beach. Same person eventually moves to unincorporated Lantana, zip code 33462. 33462 zip code includes Hypoluxo, Atlantis, and two other communities. That person eventually moved to 33435 zip code or to Boynton Beach Florida. 33435 zip code includes Boynton Beach, Briny Breezes, Delray Beach, and a few other places. This person lived in three communities, but there are another dozen or so that are 'immediate area' as you would term it. I guess you think it right to categorize from all those places which would be about 10-12 assuming all of them have People from categories. Pedantic? Horse shit, it is being accurate....William, is the complaint department really on the roof?15:38, 27 April 2020 (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 finance of the United Kingdom[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: "Category:Public finance of the United Kingdom" states that its head article is "Government spending in the United Kingdom". Our article on public finance states that it is the branch of economics that analyzes the public sector, which doesn't describe the category's contents. buidhe02:08, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, the category content is not just about spending but also about income (taxes) and generating cash (bonds). I would be open to an alternative rename because of nom's reasons but then at least to a broader name. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:12, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- There might be a case for reverse merging, except that the target for the devolved administration finance should be their respective subcategories. If anything, it may be the article that needs renaming. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:04, 25 April 2020 (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:Evening Standard Pub of the Year winners[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 Evening Standard newspaper in London recognizes one pub each year. The articles generally do mention the award but near the end of the article, not in the lede, and this doesn't seem defining since these are already well established businesses. The contents are already listified here. The parent category only contains an eponymous redirect. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:17, 23 April 2020 (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 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.
Rename to Something Or Else Merge I can see how each category would independently comply with WP:TOPICCAT and WP:SETCAT but having both is going to be a maintenance issue. Maybe an alternate word (Tsunamiology?) for the former or, even though I generally don't like this construction, Category:Individual tsunamis for the latter to make the distinction clearer. If not, they should be merged. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:45, 23 April 2020 (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.
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 May 9#Category:Documentaries about lesbians
