Category:Non-orphaned talk pages tagged with G8-exempt[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 unless a process (workflow) is identified that uses this category (neither the category text nor what-links-here gives any clue as to the purpose of the category). The pages in the category are a mix of all sorts of different things (e.g. some are redirects). Maybe the template should be changed to only categorize talk pages, but who knows? DexDor(talk)06:15, 11 July 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.
From the previous discussion I understand that nearly all spiders are venomous to some degree. If that is correct, the category is not meaningful. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:27, 11 July 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.
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 district has about a dozen villages per the Turkish WP, so it could be expanded; it just hasn't been yet. Most districts in Turkey have categories (so do most second-level administrative units in other countries), which may be the exception to WP:SMALLCAT. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:27, 10 July 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. Categories should be for grouping similar topics - not related topics as that just unnecessarily duplicates links in article text. Byblos Castle is suitably categorized by, for example, Category:Castles in Lebanon and doesn't need to be closely linked by categories to the Embriaco family. DexDor(talk)05:52, 16 July 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.
Category:European Association of Archaeologists[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.
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 as nominated; revisit the wider tree if necessary Consistency has been invoked; the broader tree issues are best handled separately. Timrollpickering (talk) 15:47, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The role of the sons of Noah in the Book of Genesis is that they are the ancestors of humanity, with detailed genealogies of nations given. Separating the article by "descendants" is redundant to that role. Dimadick (talk) 15:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That is a very narrow interpretation, bypassing the fact that the brothers were on the Ark and played an important role in Genesis 9. Yes, a genealogy are given in Genesis 10, but it is neither unique nor the first genealogy in Genesis. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:59, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The genealogy in question is the Generations of Noah/Table of Nations and it indeed unique. "The list of 70 names introduces for the first time a number of well known ethnonyms and toponyms important to biblical geography". Dimadick (talk) 15:36, 14 July 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.
Category:Ethiopian male cross-country runners[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.
Merge per nom. The non-hyphenated category was created two months before the hyphenated one, so it looks like it was just a boo boo. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me17:38, 11 July 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.
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:15th-century Christian religious leaders[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 (surprisingly) is not part of a series by century, but even if it were it would probably not make too much sense to start the series this early. The frequent appearance of Christian religious leaders beyond clergy and abbots takes off in the 16th century at earliest. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:50, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Sure, @Marcocapelle is right that Christian religious leaders outside the clergy and monasteries emerged in large quantities only the 16th century, as the Reformation took hold.
Even in the 16th century there is not much beyond clergy, abbots and Category:Protestant Reformers. Besides the exceptions are still part of the x-th century Christians category so it is not like the information is completely lost. As we need to determine a subjective starting point for this tree anyway, why not start with a century that we can decently populate. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:43, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- because there is no other obvious way in which to categorise abbesses, who held a position equivalent to clergy, but were not ordained. Categorising them merely as nuns would not reflect their prominence. We seem to have abbesses categorised by order, but not date. The list under Thorn Abbey implies that there is at least one other abbess who belongs here. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:21, 19 July 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.
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:Pages using infobox body of water without convert template[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: No clear definition of "Chowk" other than its use as part of a place name here. No parent categories. Created by enthusiastic but new editor. Does not seem to be a useful category. PamD07:17, 10 July 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.
Nominator's rationale: SMALLCAT. There have been a lot of discussions about this category before. But the main reason why it should be deleted is that there appears to simply not be very many films that are about hebephilia. ★Trekker (talk) 04:53, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Marcocapelle, the Are All Men Pedophiles? title is misleading. The film is more so about hebephilia, or rather sexual attraction to adolescents/teenagers (since hebephilia is accurately defined as a sexual preference for those in the earlier stages of pubescence). But, as I've argued times before, we don't need a hebephilia category to cover one or two films. As for Lolita? I've seen discussions about whether the man is a pedophile or not...based on the strict definition of pedophilia (especially people saying that Lolita was pubescent). This source used in the Reception section for the article to categorize it as a hebepilia film states "the film was very controversial, due to the hebephilia-related content." But eh. No need to ping me if you reply. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 22:40, 10 July 2020 (UTC) Tweaked post. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 22:51, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Marcocapelle, see what Crossroads just stated above. And, above, I did cite one source from the Lolita film article. Regardless, to quote Crossroads, "all the other points against this category stand." Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 23:01, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per my previous arguments about this category (seen on the talk page and in previous deletion discussions about it). But per the previous discussions, including the RfC that took place there, I feel that its talk page should be tagged with Template:G8-exempt (see WP:G8). That talk page should be preserved for future reference. For documentation of what was discussed with regard to this category and in case the category is created again. If that talk page is deleted, I will request that it is undeleted and tagged with Template:G8-exempt. But I am asking the administrator who deletes this category to do that so that I don't have to. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 22:21, 10 July 2020 (UTC) Tweaked post. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 22:24, 10 July 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.
Nominator's rationale: This category is anarchronisticly added to ("pederasty" is an exclusivly Greco-Roman concept that was not widely used after) articles of random modern poets. This is a SMALLCAT without that agenda pushing nonsense. ★Trekker (talk) 04:30, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Although Haiduc did not create this category, he clearly made use of it, and it was a part of his system of pederasty categories. Haiduc was banned by ArbCom in 2010 for reasons that are obvious based on the ANI discussion about him. The content he wrote was dishonest propaganda exaggerating the prevalence and social standing of practices that in today's world non-WP:Fringe sources call child sexual abuse, as explained here. Part of this effort involved purposely conflating relationships between grown males that really are part of gay history together with abusive relationships between a grown man and a young boy, and calling it all "pederasty". There is no need for this category; the articles in it can be in more appropriate categories based on what is actually discussed in each one. Crossroads-talk-05:27, 10 July 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.
Nominator's rationale: This category was originally created by a banned pedophile and pro-pedophilia advocate on Wikipedia, once he was banned this category was deleted, but was then recreated by another user (who tried to make Commons accept child pornography images). The problem with this category is the same as most other "pederasty" categories, "pederasty" is a word that almost exclusivly refers to a Greco-Roman concept and today this is called child sexual abuse by non-fringe sources. Its also worth mentioning that almost none whatsoever of these articles even mention the word "pederasty". ★Trekker (talk) 04:24, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Haiduc, apparently the original creator, was banned by ArbCom in 2010 for reasons that are obvious based on the ANI discussion about him. The re-creator is globally banned. Haiduc's overuse of "pederasty" was dishonest propaganda exaggerating the prevalence and social standing of practices that in today's world non-WP:Fringe sources call child sexual abuse, as explained here. "Pederasty" normalization involves purposely conflating relationships between grown males that really are part of gay history together with abusive relationships between a grown man and a young boy, and calling it all "pederasty". This category is a legacy of that effort, and many of the articles in it do not even mention the term pederasty. There is no need for this category; the articles in it can be in more appropriate categories based on what is actually discussed in each one. Crossroads-talk-05:35, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete another films "about" something; how, objectively do we define how much about the subject something must be to be categorized and what reliable sources tell us it's at least that much. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:33, 10 July 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:American textile industry executives[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: New name would a) allow for more people to be placed in the category, and b) be consistent with other countries' categories that take the form "______ textile industry businesspeople" pbp03:53, 10 July 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.
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.