Category:Politicians killed in accidents in India[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.
Support in principle, per nom, but the category can simply be deleted, the articles are already in road or aviation accidental deaths in India. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Their occupation seems to have no relation with the cause of death. Dimadick (talk) 19:11, 28 November 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 result of the discussion was:merge. bibliomaniac15 18:37, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to respective parent categories -- There is no purpose in having a separate "history of ..." category, unless there is scope for populating it with at least 5 articles, which is unlikely. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:48, 7 November 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: I don't believe we categorize editors by the brand of computer they use. At least, when I looked for other similar categories, I couldn't find them. LizRead!Talk! 21:44, 5 November 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: I think this is destined to be a small category and I don't see how it serves uniting editors on Wikipedia. Better as a userbox than category. LizRead!Talk! 21:40, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not contribute to building an encyclopedia; title is also gramatically incorrect. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:42, 5 November 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 result of the discussion was:delete. bibliomaniac15 18:37, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:WP:ARBITRARYCAT: how does one accurately and consistently define what qualifies as a "controversy"? Joeyconnick (talk) 21:32, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural oppose, the same argument may be made for other controversies categories, there is no specific reason to delete only this one category. The discussion should start at the level of Category:Controversies. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:26, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: that's entirely counter-productive. We're never going to get any improvements made if the litmus is "have you made every possible improvement ever across the entire project that may be related to this?" In this case, this is a very freshly created category that should be nipped early, not allowed to remain and develop inertia simply because there are potentially other categories that may be problematic for the same or related reasons. —Joeyconnick (talk) 02:45, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Very arbitrary category that will be a crap magnet that will be populated by every Tom, Dick, and Harry's idea of the Netflix films or shows that they dislike. That process has already begun and will quickly accelerate. I agree with Joeyconnick: nip it in the bud now. Sundayclose (talk) 02:02, 15 November 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:Electricity articles needing translation from Swedish Wikipedia[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: In theory, this subcat is or could have been part of Template:Expand_Swedish, but no topic-code exists for this subcategory, and afaict nothing has ever been listed in this category; probably |topic=sci should be used instead. See Template:Expand Swedish#Topics and categorization. Mathglot (talk) 21:07, 5 November 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:School shootings committed by teenagers[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. bibliomaniac15 18:37, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:This category is for people who were skilled but non-professional chess players and who are famous for some other reason. → This strongly suggests to me that this is a WP:NOTDEFINING category. Most of the articles in this category that I looked at contain little more than a throwaway statment that the person enjoyed playing chess, some of them (like Lewis Carroll) don't mention chess at all. 192.76.8.85 (talk) 17:25, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-defining as a category of people with pet dogs. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 00:35, 7 November 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 result of the discussion was:rename. ✗plicit 11:07, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:rename, in the middle ages a centralized Persian Empire was non-existant. It was part of the caliphate, or reigned by Mongols, or part of temporary local states with widely varying borders (e.g. current Iraq + western Iran, or current eastern Iran and parts of Central Asia). Marcocapelle (talk) 15:45, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Query that being the case, why try to shoe-horn it into another ahistorical category? Why not just split it into its various states (caliphate, Mongols, temporary local states)? Laurel Lodged (talk) 17:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support We do not have an article on Persia. Dimadick (talk) 19:15, 28 November 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 result of the discussion was:delete. ✗plicit 11:07, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:23, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Opose. I see no reason to why it should be less relevant than any other category sorting slavery by country. Its practical and usefull. --Aciram (talk) 19:09, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant.VRtalk 20:47, 27 November 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 result of the discussion was:merge. ✗plicit 11:07, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:merge, redundant category layer with only one subcategory. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:18, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant.VRtalk 20:47, 27 November 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: These are the same category with the same contents. I'd be happy with a merge either direction, though I slightly prefer the direction indicated here.-- Mike Selinker (talk) 05:28, 5 November 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.
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 November 13#Category:School shootings committed by teenagers
