Category:Art museums and galleries in the United States[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.
It's not really a fair comparison. A square and a plaza are essentially the same thing. An art museum is a public or private collection open to the public, whereas an art gallery is usually a commercial operation with art for sale (although it is still sometimes used to refer to an art museum). As such they are different things, but for the sake of categorisation it makes sense to group them together. Grutness...wha?03:41, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge -- It looks to me as if there may almost be an ENGVAR issue here. In England many art galleries are museums, not art sales establsihments, though these are also called galleries. I would suggest merging all non-sales galleries in US into "art museums" and explicitly reserving "art galleries" for establishments selling art. This seems to reflect the majority of the content. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:03, 29 August 2021 (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:rename to avoid the misunderstanding that this might be for Muslim people who are scholars of in any kind of subject like chemistry or linguistics. It is intended for scholars in Islam only.
Oppose speedy I agree Muslim and Islamic are not both necessary, because Islamic covers the fact that they are Muslim, however I would support renaming to 'Shia Islamic Scholars' as Muslim scholars includes both Muslims who have studied secular courses and Ulama, whereas Islamic scholars refers to Ulama. Amirahtalk22:23, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Option B is IMHO a must. We can't set Shia scholars of Islam as the contrary of Muslim scholars of Islam; both Shia and Sunni are Muslims even if they fight/hate each other. (Europe hat the same in the 17th century: a war of 30 years devastating many lands.) --Just N. (talk) 13:43, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Option A It is the only of the two options which defines their area of study. "Islamic scholar" does not limit their scholarship to religious studies. Dimadick (talk) 04:53, 27 August 2021 (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:Han dynasty people related to the Three Kingdoms[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:rename, the current category name is entirely unclear. The Three Kingdomsproper start in 220 after the formal fall of the Han dynasty. Historians sometimes also include the last decenniums of the Han dynasty in the "period of the Three Kingdoms" concept because the Han dynasty did not have much power in its end phase and China suffered from local warlords in that period too. That being said, "related to the Three Kingdoms" suggests related to those three states (emerging in 220), not to a period. People during the end of the Han dynasty is more simple and more accurate. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:47, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tentative support. I am far from certain which decades can be defined as part of the dynasty's end. But extending the Three Kingdoms period to preceding events and people seems questionable. Dimadick (talk) 21:49, 6 August 2021 (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 all, if this is about where people lived, they are or should be in a "from" category; while if it is not where they lived, the location of death is trivial, e.g. a hospital or nursing home. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Procedural relisting in light of other categories added/tagged at a later date. I've reformatted the nomination to more clearly state what is up for potential deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac1504:53, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All We do categorize people by where they were killed (by murder or other violence), where were they executed (and by whose authority), and expatriates who were murdered abroad. The location of someone's death is more defining that where they lived or what their occupation was (I certainly don't care about the occupations or backgrounds of murder victims). The main problem is that the categories above should be container categories with more developed subcategories, rather than stand-alone categories. Dimadick (talk) 05:00, 27 August 2021 (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.
you see LOL? Each time people look at it, they can take a different view on it. It's been brought up before here, I appreciate I kinda went against your advice there – which was that Segunda B and Segunda RFEF were a continuation – and made a new season cat tree, but the reason was that the existing Category:Segunda División B had Category:Third level football leagues in Europe which is no longer the case going forward (it has since been removed, nothing to do with me that one, will need to get looked at as part of this) so do we instead re-name that and have both 'third level' and 'fourth level' in its descriptive cats? If we continue that pattern, Tercera Division in its three eras will require 'third level', 'fourth level' and 'fifth level' for its overview. I'm not saying that shouldn't happen, but just something to take into consideration looking at the reorganisation overall and what we want the divisions to show. On a related note (although maybe this isn't the place – can just move it all to the FOOTBALL project page I suppose), why do we have separate player categories for all the Spanish divisions and also, for example, Category:Footballers in Germany by competition including 1. and 2. Bundesliga seprately, but English and Scottish football up to the 1990s is simply Football League/Scottish Football League players? A big task to split them up and probably unnecessary, but then why do we have them for different countries? I know for a fact that La Liga and Segunda Division in Spain are under the same umbrella, with lower levels under a different body, and pretty certain that is the same for Germany with the top two tiers (the 3rd seems to be separate). Shouldn't they all be under a common category? Crowsus (talk) 12:23, 12 August 2021 (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.
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 October 1#Footballers by city in Israel
