Jump to content
 







Main menu
    


Navigation  


●Main page
 ●Contents
 ●Current events
 ●Random article
 ●About Wikipedia
 ●Contact us
 ●Donate
  



Contribute  


●Help
 ●Learn to edit
 ●Community portal
 ●Recent changes
 ●Upload file
  







Search  

































●Create account

●Log in
 









●Create account
 ● Log in
  



Pages for logged out editors learn more  


●Contributions
 ●Talk
  


















Contents

   



(Top)
  


1 January 29  


1.1  Emigrants from former countries  




1.2  Schools in Sri Lanka  




1.3  Heritage registers in Sint Maarten  




1.4  Kidnapped Roman children  




1.5  Category:Mayors of former municipalities in the Netherlands  




1.6  Category:Urdu journalists  




1.7  Category:Country subdivisions by administrative level  




1.8  Category:Country subdivisions by continent  




1.9  Category:Mergers of country subdivisions  




1.10  Russian SFSR  




1.11  Category:History of European art music  




1.12  Art Nouveau architecture by city  




1.13  OMX  




1.14  Category:Recipients of the Order of Work and Production  




1.15  Category:Heroes of Labour (GDR)  















Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 January 29







Add links
  








●Project page
 ●Talk
  
















●Read
 ●Edit
 ●View history
  







Tools
    


Actions  


●Read
 ●Edit
 ●View history
  



General  


●What links here
 ●Related changes
 ●Upload file
 ●Special pages
 ●Permanent link
 ●Page information
 ●Get shortened URL
 ●Download QR code
  



Print/export  


●Download as PDF
 ●Printable version
  















Appearance
    

 





From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  
< Wikipedia:Categories for discussion‎ | Log
< January 28 January 30 >

January 29[edit]

Emigrants from former countries[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 these, but no consensus to consider this an overall precedent. No prejudice against a broader/group nom at editorial discretion. - jc37 01:39, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "From" is more applicable than "of" in the case of emigrants. This nomination will achieve consistency with others where there is not a single-word demonym, namely Category:Emigrants from the Russian Empire‎ and its sub-cats (just renamed per Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_December_3#Russian_Empire_people), & Category:Emigrants from Nazi Germany and its sub-cats. – Fayenatic London 22:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Holy Roman Empire was disestablished in 1806. I do not agree with renaming to German though, because the HRE also contained half of Italy, Austria, the Southern Netherlands and Bohemia. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:58, 31 January 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.

Schools in Sri Lanka[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only an eponymous article and one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:03, 29 January 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.

Heritage registers in Sint Maarten[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/delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:57, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: there is only one heritage register in Sint Maarten with content on Wikipedia, and it does not seem appropriate to have 2 different categories about it. All other categories are empty parents with no other content, forming a long string of unnecessary categories. Place Clichy (talk) 16:33, 29 January 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.

Kidnapped Roman children[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. I have put the two articles in Category:Kidnapped children and Category:Roman victims of crime. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:15, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I don't see the use for these categories. The first contains only two people, one of whom didn't die as a child (hemay have been kidnapped while as a child), and there is simply very little information on the other. As for the other category, not only is it basically empty (but for the equally questionable subcategory of kidnapped children), but 'children' could technically encompass every single person that has ever existed, and, in any event, very few children will meet notability standards. I suggest the two "children" contained in these categories be moved to Category:Kidnapped Roman people, seeing that it's otherwise empty too. Avilich (talk) 15:05, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bissula (a German, not a Roman) seems just like a normal spoil of war, whereas Musa of Parthia is not said in her article to have been kidnapped specifically. I don't think either fits into this particular category. I'm fine with either deleting the two nominated categories or upmerging them with Category:Kidnapped Roman people. Avilich (talk) 15:40, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wrote they were examples. I'm interested to know if according to you this situation (of children captured at a young age and sold into slavery) meets the category definition. Also Bissula, by her slavery and subsequent release, was indeed a Roman. We don't, and probably shouldn't, have ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Kidnapped Alaman children, although as do have ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Kidnapped German children. Place Clichy (talk) 00:35, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If it can be demonstrated that they were Romans and children at the time of their kidnapping, then it fits the definition. I just don't think childhood alone is a particularly good qualifier (the kidnapping is what really matters here), especially in this case, since we just have very few, if any, examples to work with. Avilich (talk) 12:39, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The 'proconsul' in question was Marcus Antonius (orator), Antony's grandfather. So she was probably a child. Avilich (talk) 19:14, 30 January 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:Mayors of former municipalities in the Netherlands[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete, anachronistic categories, while these people were mayor etc of that municipality, the municipality was not a former municipality yet. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just for info, in most cases it concerns villages or small towns that were later incorporated in larger rural municipalities (so not exactly cities). But in principle you are right of course. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:49, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Categorised as if mayor of the successor would be entirely wrong in this case. It is not a matter of attendence but of heading. The mayor of one village never headed the neighbouring villages that were later merged into a new municipality. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:03, 31 January 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:Urdu journalists[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: merge the Pakistani and Indian category, no need to split journalists by country and language, especially since both are not very well populated. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:36, 29 January 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:Country subdivisions by administrative level[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 Category:Sixth-level administrative country subdivisions; no consensus to delete the rest. As long as they are being kept, rename those remaining to ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Administrative divisions by level and country, ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:First-level administrative divisions by country, ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Second-level administrative divisions by country, ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Third-level administrative divisions by country, ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Fourth-level administrative divisions by country, and ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Fifth-level administrative divisions by country. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:24, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No need for this amount of navigational detail, as "levels" don't really translate well from country to country, or province to state to territory. Many false equivalencies.
Each level has long head notes about how to categorize, but they have not been followed rigorously (or at all). By the 5th and 6th levels, they are mostly France, yet communities and communes are equivalent to other "levels" in other countries.
As with continents, most are duplicated in both the level and the subcategories of the level, as well as the "by country" tree under this same parent. WP:OC category clutter.
WP:CSD#G5 Creation of banned User:TurkChan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) sockpuppet of Tobias Conradi.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 08:01, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • As stated in the nomination, arbitrary numbering isn't a useful navigation. The top "level" of Micronesia is not the equivalent of the top "level" of Russia or China or the US. Of courrse, both the US and Canada have wrong levels. The "first level" administrative division in the US is commonly the "County".
    William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:33, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The top level of Micronesia is equivalent to the top level of Russia or China or the US. There is just a quantitative difference (they are obviously smaller), not a fundamental difference. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:57, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The US and Canada do not have wrong levels per se, the category structure apparently assumes that political divisions and administrative divisions are overlapping, which is worth a separate discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with Carlos on the naming issue. Turning it around: in Spain they are called Regions, in Germany they are called States, but despite the different names they have the same functionality of first level country divisions. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:30, 31 January 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:Country subdivisions by continent[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) Vaticidalprophet (talk) 08:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Continents are divided by countries (political divisions), not by lower level municipalities and neighborhoods (administrative divisions).
Most are duplicated in the continent category itself, and also a subcategory per country per continent, and again in the "by country" tree under this same parent. WP:OC category clutter.
WP:CSD#G5 Creation of banned User:TrueColour (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) sockpuppet of Tobias Conradi. Possibly an effort to make it difficult to rename or reorganize.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:26, 29 January 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:Mergers of country subdivisions[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:51, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:C2D main article, and WP:C2C parent Category:Administrative divisions
William Allen Simpson (talk) 06:30, 29 January 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.

Russian SFSR[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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:38, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Normally, we don't use country abbreviations in categories. Do we want to use the full name in these cases? The category names would be quite long. These are the only three subcategories of ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic that use the abbreviation. Some existing categories have names that are equally long as those proposed here, such as ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Council of People's Commissars of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Prisoners and detainees of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:52, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 14:40, 30 January 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:History of European art music[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 to Category:History of classical music. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Stumbled across this will cleaning up Category:Classical music, it seems largely unhelpful. No real defining features and a seemingly random choice of articles. All of the articles here already have plenty of appropriate categories. Aza24 (talk) 05:29, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:39, 29 January 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.

Art Nouveau architecture by city[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. Some users indicated that they would keep those that contained five or more articles. At the time of this close, none of the categories had more than three articles in them. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:28, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging:

more categories nominated

Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, just one, two or three articles in each of these categories and they are not part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme. This is follow-up on this earlier discussion, @Paul 012: pinging contributor to the previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:52, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll be happy to withdraw categories from this list if you can decently populate them. That is, it would be helpful to populate them (if possible) even regardless of this nomination because it serves nobody's interest to have half-populated categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:55, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although I would obviously love to, I am not required to "decently populate" 40-odd categories simply because you have nominated them. It is entirely irrelevant to the issue at hand. With respect, have you actually read the criteria for deletion at WP:SMALLCAT?"Note also that this criterion does not preclude all small categories; a category which does have realistic potential for growth, such as a category for holders of a notable political office, may be kept even if only a small number of its articles actually exist at the present time." The French version of Category:Art Nouveau architecture in Antwerp, I note, is populated by 36 separate articles on individual buildings and a sub-category of eight Antwerp-based Art Nouveau architects!
I actively disagree that "it serves nobody's interest to have half-populated categories" which seems contrary to the Wikipedia's whole project which is, by definition, gradual and incrimental. There was doubtless a time when Category:Presidents of the United States was only half-populated. In my opinion, this nomination should be withdrawn and re-submitted in smaller groups to enable each to be considered on its own merits. It is possible that some indeed fall foul of WP:SMALLCAT. —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:40, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The mention of the 36 separate articles on individual buildings and a sub-category of eight local architects in Antwerp was lost on you, then? The position may well be similar for some of the other cities you have nominated. WP:SMALLCAT is about potential for the category to be populated, not whether it will imminently be so. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dimadick, it may be true that some of these cities have only a couple of notable buildings but there are far too many currently at issue to reach that conclusion for all. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:36, 29 January 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.

OMX[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 Category:OMXtoCategory:Nasdaq Nordic and Category:Companies listed on the OMX exchangestoCategory:Companies listed on Nasdaq Nordic. However, since the consensus for this was not particularly strong, this close is without prejudice to a follow-up nomination of the newly named categories. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:36, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to the category:Nasdaq, Inc., which originally was named category:NASDAQ OMX Group. The name is OMX is not in use any more and the group structure has been modified and does not include the corresponding structure. Also all relevant articles including the name OMX have been renamed. It will simplify the categories tree and assist our readers. As an alternative, also merge category:NASDAQ with those two categories. In that case, the name of trilateral merger should be category:Nasdaq. Beagel (talk) 19:47, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this merge/rename; they should be renamed to Category:Nasdaq Nordic/Category:Companies listed on Nasdaq Nordic instead; Nasdaq Nordic is a brand still used by Nasdaq for which we have an article. UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:26, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We could use Nasdaq Nordic, of course, instead of the proposal above, but I am afraid it complicates the structure. As for the Nasdaq Nordic article, that article was recently redirected to Nasdaq, Inc. and this redirect was reverted just few days ago, so it is not so well established. Beagel (talk) 07:42, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. NASDAQ is the largest stock exchanges owned by Nasdaq, Inc. (former name: NASDAQ OMX Group), which was created by merger of NASDAQ and OMX owner companies. Since then, the Nasdaq, Inc. structure has modified and the name OMX is not in use any more. In this context, it is irrelevant which companies are listed on Nasdaq in New York and which companies are listed on Nasdaq Tallinn. These are different stock exchanges, but they belong to the same group, which parent is Nasdaq, Inc. Beagel (talk) 13:47, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not moved and the new category is not identical to Category:Companies listed on the OMX exchanges but it is broader. I knew and fully agree that it is not allowed to empty categories during open discussion but it was actually done after the close of this discussion and before the close was reverted. It was a good faith attempt to bring the structure of Nasdaq exchanges' categories more up to date. I will restore Category:Companies listed on the OMX exchanges for those subcategories; however, the created Category:Companies listed on Nasdaq exchanges is needed even in the case Category:Companies listed on the OMX exchanges will be renamed Category:Companies listed on Nasdaq Nordic exchanges. Beagel (talk) 08:38, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It had been closed Keep, now has been reopened.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, William Allen Simpson (talk) 09:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:31, 29 January 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:Recipients of the Order of Work and Production[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD, WP:SMALLCAT)
The Order of Work and Production is an Iranian award for supporting industrial production. This award might be defining to the winners but all but one are redlinks who are likely non-notable. (The one exception is Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar who received the award for missile construction as the Defence Minister of Iran and is already well categorized under Category:Defence ministers of Iran.) We have a Catch-22 where, when the award is defining enough for a category, they aren't notable enough for an article and, when they're notable enough for an article, the category is no longer defining. The recipient(s) are already listified right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:49, 29 January 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:Heroes of Labour (GDR)[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEFINING (WP:OCAWARD, WP:OVERLAPCAT)
The Hero of Labour (GDR) is an East German award usually given for for economic output, like with this list of recipients from a watch factory. Despite the Communist era effort to elevate the status of workers, the vast majority of the 3,688 total recipients are non-notable and won't ever have a Wikipedia article, the only exception being Ernst Wulf. The other 12 articles in this category are all very high ranking national officials and all 12 are already under Category:Members of the Volkskammer (the GDR Parliament) and mention this award in passing with other honours. There wasn't a list so I created one right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:49, 29 January 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.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_January_29&oldid=1015713712"




●This page was last edited on 3 April 2021, at 02:32 (UTC).
●Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.


●Privacy policy
●About Wikipedia
●Disclaimers
●Contact Wikipedia
●Code of Conduct
●Developers
●Statistics
●Cookie statement
●Mobile view


Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki