Category:NAIA College football coaches 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.
Nominator's rationale: This is a recently created category that goes against the consensus of organizing college athletes/coaches. We don't need to diffuse by organization or division. –Aidan721 (talk) 23:24, 3 February 2024 (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:NCAA Division III College football coaches 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.
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:NCAA Division II College football coaches 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.
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:Portrayals of the Virgin Mary in film[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.
Comment: "Portrayals of Mary, mother of Jesus, in film" would follow MOS:COMMA. As "mother of Jesus" is a parenthetical phrase, how necessary is it for the category name – could it be "Portrayals of Mary in film"? Ham II (talk) 16:46, 8 February 2024 (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, this is a set category containing films, rather than a topic category with articles about how female bisexuality is depicted. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:57, 3 February 2024 (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.
Oppose for what seems like the obvious reason that not all depictions of Cleopatra in film are about Cleopatra. Looking over the contents in the category, as many as half of the entries are about other persons or subjects, with Cleopatra merely a character appearing in them. Changing the name of the category as proposed would greatly narrow its scope. I see no reason why only films that are actually about Cleopatra are relevant to how she's portrayed; if incidental depictions vary from how she's portrayed in biographical pictures, that's perfectly relevant to her depiction in general. The case could—and probably should—be made that "in" film is a better description for motion pictures and television, as opposed to still photos. P Aculeius (talk) 13:57, 4 February 2024 (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:UC San Diego Tritons men's soccer coaches[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 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.
I can accept a merge to / creation of Category:Goldey–Beacom Lightning coaches, but I completely oppose merging them to the related U.S. coaches categories. They are container categories that have been well-maintained for years, and this would simply cause disorder to a long-standing organized page. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:56, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of the categories Liz mentioned are container categories. Moreover, college football coaches has a diffusion tag, not a container tag. It just so happens to be empty of pages, but it says very clearly: "Pages in this category should be moved to subcategories where applicable."Mason (talk) 21:27, 3 February 2024 (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 per nom. And I agree that both categories (one about rape and the other about prostitution) are not exclusive to women. Mason (talk) 20:04, 3 February 2024 (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:UC San Diego Tritons football coaches[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.
Anything but merge to the container category (Coaches in the U.S.), an action which would make no sense and create disorder to a long-standing and well-organized category. Keep it, delete it, just don't merge it there. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The merge target isn't a container category. It's tagged with a diffusion tag. At the moment there are no pages in it, but that is because there are many of these tiny coach categories with only a single page. Those tiny categories aren't helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 21:33, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The tag says "when applicable" they need to be in subcats, and all of these coaches (one in the case) coached for other teams as well. So there would be one single article in the otherwise well-organized category that has functioned as a container cat, whereas the other 10,000 (including the one at hand here) would be in subcats. That doesn't make sense. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:51, 4 February 2024 (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.
Support in principle, per nom, and also because Georgia did not exist yet as a country. But rather take Category:Explorers of Iran as the merge target because the subject of the article travelled through Iran generally rather than just Georgia (which was ruled by Iran). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:56, 26 January 2024 (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.
Oppose upmerging Mongolian folk culture and Sindhi folk culture, weak support for the others – The categories are part of the category tree for folk culture and removing them from there would be unhelpful for finding content within that category tree. Some of these categories are a bit specific, but the Mongolian category has much room for expansion, and both categories I opposed now contain two subcategories. Note: Category:Liberian folklore should also upmerge to Category:African folklore. MClay1 (talk) 03:19, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The liberian category should not be merged to African folklore, because the only category in it as Liberian folklorists, which is already properly categorized into Folklorists by nationality etc. Mason (talk) 20:07, 3 February 2024 (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: Suggest prefacing these categories with "WikiProject" for consistency and to clarify that these are internal categories not content categories. Also inserted "in" for better grammar. Also changed "edit-a-thons" to a more general name "by year" because they are not all called edit-a-thons and thes categories are used to hold other pages like metrics — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:16, 26 January 2024 (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:Islamic organisations based in Kerala[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.
Category:Institutes of higher Islamic learning in Kerala[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: Based on the parent: Islamic education in India. Could also be renamed to Islamic universities and colleges in Kerala Mason (talk) 23:35, 26 January 2024 (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:20th-century Danish men by occupation[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.
Category:15th-century singers by nationality[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: Upmerge for now. There's only one (or two) nationality in each of these categories, which isn't helpful for navigation Mason (talk) 16:33, 3 February 2024 (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.
Comment. The nominator's rationale of SharedName does not make much sense because then the clergy categories to which they want to merge to do not appear to have a different situation. I would say if anything it could be a case of a possible redundant category but before saying that, we need to analyze its parent category, Category:Priests and that of the latter, Category:Clergy by type. (Pinging editors that appeared in the relevant page histories @Goustien and Debresser:). Regards, Thinker78(talk)04:45, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Before commenting I spent a while digging and I also found an ancient CfD that editors may read for important context as well. To find the complete discussion, use the "find" function of the browser to look for "===[[:Category:Priests]]===". Regards, Thinker78(talk)05:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whether we need to take a look at Category:Priests as a whole remains to be seen. The problem with the nominated categories above is different, they contain Christian clergy but they do not show up under Christian clergy. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thinker78, Goustien, and Debresser: I did check all the members in every nominated category. The nomination is to split the Japanese and Sri Lankan categories, including Jikō Higashifushimi who is the sole Buddhist. In such cases the eventual redirects should be to e.g. Japanese clergy rather than Japanese Christian clergy. Likewise "Palestinian" is not merged to Christian.
Support per nom. Unnecessary. Just based on the fact that some denominations and religions use the word "priest" and some don't. Categorisation by terminology is rarely helpful. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:11, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nominator, with exception of the partial merge (which, I notice, has gone unnoticed in previous comments). Lets revisit the issue of what to do with the Priest category afterwards on that category's talkpage (@Thinker78:, please ping me again if you open a discussion there). Debresser (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2024 (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:Ernst von Siemens Composers' Prize 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 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 seems like a non-defining intersection. At the very least, I think it needs to be renamed to make it clearer. The page description is quite specific... "Early photographers is meant here as: active before 1948, in Ottoman Palestine (from the invention of photography until 1917–1918), and in British-ruled Palestine (from the conquest in the First World War until withdrawal in May 1948). In this time "Palestine" and "Palestinian" did not have a single ethno-political significance, being used for a politically dependent territory and all of its inhabitants. Western photographers active in Palestine/the Holy Land during this period also belong added here, as do Armenian, Christian Arab, Jewish, Muslim Arab and any other resident photographers." Mason (talk) 06:18, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You really want to make things unnecessarily long and complicated. Why adding "active", why adding "region"?! "In Egypt" means they were photographing in Egypt, not vegetating there, so surely active; and Palestine is a vague concept, it's as much a region as a "land", only UN-registered nation states might have clear borders (Israel sure doesn't). A geographical region might mean a topographical unit, or a political unit, so the only reason to add it is to satisfy those afraid of Palestinian propaganda (anachronistic retroprojection of nation concept), so not a must for the less obsessed. Brevity IS a principle and requirement on Wiki, and commonsensical too. Arminden (talk) 16:38, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it were unnecessary, then we wouldn't be at this category discussion. Brevity is only as useful as it is clear. What I'm trying to convey to you is that the present category as named isn't clearly distinguishable from other larger category naming conventions. Mason (talk) 21:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's circular. We're here because you opened it up. So not an argument.
You noticed that "The page description is quite specific". I wrote it, and precisely because any systematisation effort is only as good as the definitions it uses. And I gave here detailed explanations for each and every detail in that definition/description. I don't, indeed, see what the problem is supposed to be, and you haven't made it very clear. My main point is: this category is a useful tool, and a logical and well defined item. Useful for those who deal with the subjects involved, users and editors alike: one clicks on it and quickly finds useful information. The rest, honestly, doesn't interest me much, not as user and not as editor, unless someone can prove to me I'm wrong: not a useful tool, not logical, not well defined. Strictly formal reservations I dismiss as bureaucratical and damaging the purpose of Wiki, of serving the user. Arminden (talk) 09:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Add "region" if you wish. Photographing the "Holy Land" was, and still is, a very specific activity. This was a major topic in the early decades of photography, following in the footsteps of the Grand Tour tradition, and needs little discussion. Orientalism was clearly one aspect. Once Zionism steps in, plus Ottoman, Arab, Greater Syrian, and finally Arab Palestinian nationalism, the range of topics widens a lot. Modern reportage and journalism do too. So the need for such a category is absolutely clear to anyone dealing with the subject, as is the starting point and first period (the mention by @Marcocapelle:ofCategory:Early photographers in Egypt is absolutely to the point, everybody knew what they expected and ancient vs modern definitions of Egypt and its borders never bothered anyone). The qeustion here might be: when to set the end date? This will always be less consensual, and 1948 seemed to me to be a very practical and useful finish line. Once Israel is established, several topics take a new turn, modernity is quite advanced already and "pioneering" soon largely loses any exploratory meaning and only keeps that of experimenting artistically and technically. Then why not 1914 or 1918? That can be discussed. The Bonfils company continues its 19th-century-style work into the 30s, but modern photography moves in at an ever faster pace. However, the Eurocentric spirit is unbroken, as is the sense of pioneering in exotic areas, so a development and continuation in spirit of earlier styles. If one sets the finish line in 1918, or the late 20s, that does indeed separate the modernists from the picturalists, but also leaves out a whole bunch of traditionalists who would be left out of any category. And categories are there to help search & research, to help quickly find ideally all the related Wiki items. Not a rigurous history of art exercise, but a search engine item.
Adding "region" or not is for the conflict-obsessed, who only see Israel/Palestine through that filter and want to avoid ceding any ground to the opposite side, no matter how clumsy and syereotyped language becomes. But these are the times, so - whatever. But definitely, KEEP!Arminden (talk) 14:00, 3 February 2024 (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:People executed by Alabama by gas chamber[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.
Category:Historical red-light districts 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.
Nominator's rationale: Vague. What counts as "historical". If kept, it needs a better name, like "Former" and a parent category. Mason (talk) 01:04, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to "former ....". For consistency with parent cats ("Former districts..." and "Former neighborhoods..."). While I understand the point about "historical" being somewhat undefined, as noted by Marcocapelle many (and possibly none) of the category members are active "red-light districts". In particular, classifying Grafton Street (in Dublin) or Times Square (in NY) as "red-light districts" (without qualification) would be more than a little misrepresentative of the current use/nature of either place.... Guliolopez (talk) 16:56, 3 February 2024 (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:Prostitution in the Byzantine Empire[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.
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 11#Category:Libraries by year of establishment
