WP:CFD/T

See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion policies for the official rules of this page, and how to do cleanup.

Deletion of a category may mean that the articles and images in it are directly put in its parent category, or that another subdivision of the parent category is made. If they are already members of more suitable categories, it may also mean that they become a member of one category less.

How to use this page

Know if the category you are looking at needs deleting (or to be created). If it is a "red link" and has no articles or subcategories, then it is already deleted (more likely, it was never really created in the first place), and does not need to be listed here.
Read and understand Wikipedia:Categorization before using this page. Nominate categories that violate policies here, or are misspelled, mis-capitalized, redundant/need to be merged, not NPOV, small without potential for growth, or are generally bad ideas. (See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Manual of Style.)
Please read the Wikipedia:Categorization of people policy if nominating or voting on a people-related category.
Unless the category to be deleted is non-controversial – vandalism or a duplicate, for example – please do not depopulate the category (remove the tags from articles) before the community has made a decision.
Add {{cfd}} to the category page for deletion. (If you are recommending that the category be renamed, you may also add a note giving the suggested new name.) This will add a message to it, and also put the page you are nominating into Category:Categories for deletion. It's important to do this to help alert people who are watching or browsing the category.
1. Alternately, use the rename template like this: {{cfr|newname}}
2. If you are concerned with a stub category, make sure to inform the WikiProject Stub sorting
Add new deletion candidates under the appropriate day near the top of this page.
1. Alternatively, if the category is a candidate for speedy renaming (see Wikipedia:Category renaming), add it to the speedy category at the bottom.
Make sure you add a colon (:) in the link to the category being listed, like [[:Category:Foo]]. This makes the category link a hard link which can be seen on the page (and avoids putting this page into the category you are nominating).
Sign any listing or vote you make by typing ~~~~ after your text.
Link both categories to delete and categories to merge into. Failure to do this will delay consideration of your suggestion.

Special notes

Some categories may be listed in Category:Categories for deletion but accidently not listed here.

Discussion for Today

This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024_September_25

September 25

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:Tourist attractions in Salem

Propose deleting Category:Tourist attractions in Salem (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: IS empty. The one entry was not relevant, so was deleted Isoceles-sai (talk) 08:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category has been emptied. You know, Isoceles-sai, you can tag empty categories CSD C1 and that won't entail a week-long (or longer) discussion. There is really no point of having a discussion about an empty category. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Public holidays in the Republic of Artsakh

Propose deleting Category:Public holidays in the Republic of Artsakh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, but move Artsakh Revival Day directly under Category:Culture of the Republic of Artsakh. Apart from this one article they are general Armenian public holidays. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nazis from outside Germany

Propose renaming Category:Nazis from outside Germany to Category:Nazis by nationality

Nominator's rationale: We don't tend to name categories by who is not in them. This is effectively Nazis by nationality, so we out to treat it that way Mason (talk) 04:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional giant planets

Propose merging Category:Fictional giant planets to Category:Fictional planets

Nominator's rationale: With only 2 planets so far, there does not appear to be a need for such overly-precise categorization. The idea of a "giant" planet seems to be an unclear and subjective metric as well. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:33, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Members of the Chamber of Representatives of Belgium

Propose renaming Category:Belgian deputies of the 48th legislature to Category:Members of the 48th Chamber of Representatives (Belgium)
Propose renaming Category:Belgian deputies of the 49th legislature to Category:Members of the 49th Chamber of Representatives (Belgium)
Propose renaming Category:Belgian deputies of the 50th legislature to Category:Members of the 50th Chamber of Representatives (Belgium)
Propose renaming Category:Belgian deputies of the 51st legislature to Category:Members of the 51st Chamber of Representatives (Belgium)
Propose renaming Category:Belgian deputies of the 52nd legislature to Category:Members of the 52nd Chamber of Representatives (Belgium)
Propose renaming Category:Belgian deputies of the 53rd legislature to Category:Members of the 53rd Chamber of Representatives (Belgium)
Propose renaming Category:Belgian deputies of the 54th legislature to Category:Members of the 54th Chamber of Representatives (Belgium)
Propose renaming Category:Belgian deputies of the 55th legislature to Category:Members of the 55th Chamber of Representatives (Belgium)
Propose renaming Category:Belgian deputies of the 56th legislature to Category:Members of the 56th Chamber of Representatives (Belgium)

Nominator's rationale: Belgium has a bicameral legislature. These categories are intended for members of the Chamber of Representatives, the lower chamber. There are separate categories for members of the Senate, the upper chamber. Using the term "legislature" in the category makes it ambiguous.Obi2canibe (talk) 20:13, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all to Category:Members of the Chamber of Representatives (Belgium), this is massive overcategorization. Have a look at e.g. Daniel Bacquelaine. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In accordance with WP:DIFFUSE, legislator categories are often sub-categorised by term in order to prevent the parent category from becoming overpopulated. This can result in long serving legislators being included in several categories e.g. Jeremy Corbyn is included in 11 categories, Angela Merkel is included in 8 categories.--Obi2canibe (talk) 20:56, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then better diffuse them by century, similar to what we do with politicians in general. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:55, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How would that help overpopulation? We already have several hundred articles on English Wikipedia for Belgian MPs and this could potentially increase to more than 3,000 articles. Assuming an even distribution, that's 2,250 20th century members and 750 21st century members.--Obi2canibe (talk) 17:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More participation needed to form consensus. I am not seeing objections to the proposed rename, if there is no consensus to merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:28, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from the State of Palestine

Propose merging Category:People from the State of Palestine to Category:Palestinian people

Nominator's rationale: My previous proposal to disambiguate was closed due to a lack of consensus, with some reasonable arguments referencing the millions of Palestinians in the diaspora who are not from the State of Palestine. Therefore, I propose a merge. No other country makes a distinction similar to that between Category:French people and Category:People from France. Sakakami (talk) 06:55, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My first instinct was to oppose, but after seeing which subcategories are in each of these two categories (with a considerable amount of overlap) I rather tend to support. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedurally oppose. The last discussion was closed yesterday. And none of the contributors were pinged. Mason (talk) 20:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Web-julio, @Namiba pinging all contributors to the previous discussion. Sakakami (talk) 21:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. But I agree with Marco that it needs purging. Web-julio (talk) 22:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a completely different proposal than Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 9#Category:Palestinian people. Sakakami (talk) 21:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it were completely different, why did you literally cite it as the rationale for this proposal? Mason (talk) 10:46, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In a way, this proposal is the opposite of the September 9 proposal to disambiguate Category:Palestinian people. Here, I am suggesting a merge into Category:Palestinian people. Do you have any substantial feedback on the content of the proposal, rather than just a procedural opposition? Sakakami (talk) 15:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If kept, purge? Still no consensus to keep or merge, however.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:27, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:20th-century disestablishments in East Germany

Propose deleting Category:20th-century disestablishments in East Germany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:20th-century establishments in East Germany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:20th-century disestablishments in West Germany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:20th-century establishments in West Germany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, duplicate of Category:Disestablishments in East Germany by decade because the entire history of East Germany stayed within the 20th century. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

comment it does seem redundant, but maybe it is simply for formal reasons, Category:20th-century disestablishments in Germany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs).

No, there is no formal reason, Category:20th-century disestablishments in Czechoslovakia does not exist either. At most we may keep them aa redirects. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle: By the way, what would you suggest about confusing forking of category:20th-century disestablishments in West Germany vs. category:20th-century disestablishments in Germany?
For example, compare Category:1950 disestablishments in Germany and Category:1950 disestablishments in West Germany. Or maybe I miss something. --Altenmann >talk 20:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Maybe it is West Berlin? --Altenmann >talk 20:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is odd indeed. I would expect Germany to contain two subcategories, East and West. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have added three siblings one day later. The West German categories weren't even part of the tree of West Germany. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am not seeing objections to deletion, but there is a good deal of discussion here. In other words: if you object to deletion (regardless of if you have already participated or not), please speak up :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:26, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:SpaceX astronauts

Propose renaming Category:SpaceX astronauts to Category:SpaceX-flown astronauts or something similar, per discussion on the Category talk:SpaceX astronauts.

Nominator's rationale: Prior to September 2024, all astronauts listed in Category:SpaceX astronauts had simply flown on a SpaceX capsule launched on a SpaceX Falcon 9 launch vehicle. Now, with the completion of the recent private spaceflight mission Polaris Dawn, two SpaceX employees—Sarah Gillis and Anna Menon—have been astronauts (while employed by SpaceX) on this recent commercial spaceflight. It would be confusing to categorize the two of them as merely the sense of astronauts who have flown on SpaceX equipment, as they are also SpaceX employees, and are categorized in Category:SpaceX employee astronauts. (more emplyees are planned to fly on future spaceflights). N2e (talk) 17:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - the current tree Astronauts by space program > SpaceX astronauts > SpaceX employee astronauts makes sense. If anything, Category:SpaceX employee astronauts (2) is unnecessary since 1) it is simply an overlap of Category:SpaceX people (21) & Category:SpaceX astronauts (38), and 2) is not (yet) needed for diffusing either of its parents, but that can be overlooked if it grows quickly enough. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 14:58, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More participation needed to form consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 04:24, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Naval mines by type

Propose merging Category:Naval mines by type to Category:Naval mines

Nominator's rationale: I don't see why we need to isolate naval mines from the core category. This doesn't help navigation Mason (talk) 03:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. If kept, at least rename to Category:Types of naval mines since this is not a container category. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Naval mines of Finland

Propose merging Category:Naval mines of Finland to Category:Naval mines
Propose merging Category:Naval mines of the United Kingdom to Category:Naval mines
Propose merging Category:Naval mines by country to Category:Naval mines

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge this category. Its currently isolated, and two of the child categories are underpopulated Category:Naval mines of Finland‎ (1) Category:Naval mines of the United Kingdom‎ (1) Mason (talk) 03:46, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Elite 11 participants

Propose deleting Category:Elite 11 participants (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This is a high school football competition. It is a non-defining characteristic User:Namiba 20:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - A list of participants on the main article (Elite 11) exists, making this a defining category. It being limited to high school players shouldn't be the only argument for deletion as it is a national competition by invite only. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taking part in this competition is a minor part of any player's career. It would definitely not be suitable for an introduction and sources do not consistently refer to it. Per WP:NONDEF, "a defining characteristic is one that reliable, secondary sources commonly and consistently define, in prose, the subject as having. For example: "Subject is an adjective noun ..." or "Subject, an adjective noun, ...". If such examples are common, each of adjective and noun may be deemed to be "defining" for subject.

if the characteristic would not be appropriate to mention in the lead section of an article (regardless of whether it is currently mentioned in the lead), it is probably not defining; if the characteristic falls within any of the forms of overcategorization mentioned on this page, it is probably not defining."--User:Namiba

Delete, trivial characteristic of anyone's career. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:19, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:58, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Former objects

Propose merging Category:Former objects to Category:Former entities

Nominator's rationale: Would it be correct to call these "former objects"? After all, a mine being shut down doesn't make it disappear, and being smashed into a million pieces doesn't remove something from existence. I don't think this category makes that much sense, and is heavily overlapping either way, so it should be merged. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning support, the content of the category is a hodgepodge. But the target already has 50+ subcategories, I wish we could find some way of structuring it. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep as a somewhat helpful diffusion of the parent. I have diffused a few other sub-cats of that parent but it is indeed a mixture. Category:Former business entities (or similar) could hold Defunct brands, Former corporate subsidiaries by company, Former dual-listed companies, Former government-owned companies, Former joint ventures, Defunct companies, Defunct record labels. Category:People by former status might be useful for biography categories, but I only noticed Former members of organizations, Former billionaires and Former slaves that would go there. – Fayenatic London 09:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I created Category:Former business entities. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

some of the items in former objects probably should not be there. a mine is not an object, its a geographical or even geological feature, not an object. its a structure of sorts. however, i still stand by this as my effort to create broader and broader categories up to the most basic categories on WP. maybe cull some categories out of it. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 22:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep The possible problems with the mine example aside, I agree with the nomination insofar as these here do not stop being objects as such, but they are no longer the type of object they once were. So the category makes sense in this regard. I can't think of a better title which describes this 100% accurately and remains concise at the same time, so I would tend to keep it as a helpful organizational tier as described by Fayenatic london. Category:People by former status likewise seems a good idea to have. Daranios (talk) 08:43, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:58, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Saint Paul Seminary School of Divinity alumni

Propose renaming Category:Saint Paul Seminary School of Divinity alumni to Category:Saint Paul Seminary alumni

Nominator's rationale: The seminary no longer uses the School of Divinity title in its name or branding and has not for the past several years.~Darth Stabro^{Talk/Contribs} 19:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please tag the category page. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will tag the category.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Toxic enzymes

Propose deleting Category:Toxic enzymes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category isn't very helpful with only one page in it. Mason (talk) 20:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's also not meaningfully different from Category:Protein toxins and can be merged/redirected into that. ― Synpath 11:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Related: while updating Category:Protein toxins with Botulinum toxin I found Category:Biological toxin weapons - a bizarrely named, small category with mostly protein toxins within it. I removed the small molecule toxins from it and think it should be merged to Category:Protein toxins. ― Synpath 12:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should we merged?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]