Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/Today

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut

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

Deletion tools
Policy (log)
Articles (howto · log)
Templates (howto · log)
Categories (howto · log)
Mergers
Page moves
Speedy
All speedy templates
Unfree files
Transwiki (howto · log)
All transwiki templates

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

[edit]
  1. 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.
  2. 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.)
  3. Please read the Wikipedia:Categorization of people policy if nominating or voting on a people-related category.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
  6. 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.
  7. 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).
  8. Sign any listing or vote you make by typing ~~~~ after your text.
  9. Link both categories to delete and categories to merge into. Failure to do this will delay consideration of your suggestion.

Special notes

[edit]

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

Discussion for Today

[edit]
This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025_March_13


March 13

[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS

[edit]

Category:Entertainers from Bakersfield, California

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries

Also propose merging-

All categories with two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 18:45, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rock bandleaders

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with unclear and subjective inclusion criteria. "Bandleader" was a jazz-specific concept (i.e. specifically in big band jazz) that doesn't really have the same currency in rock music at all, so it's deeply subjective and arbitrary as to who would or wouldn't belong here: the lead singer? The primary songwriter(s)? The person in the band who's deemed to be its primary "creative force", regardless of their instrumental role? Any person whose backing band is eponymously named? Anybody who's the sole constant member of any musical project whose membership otherwise varies from release to release? Every "solo" singer-songwriter who works with a team of session musicians?
The term just doesn't have a straightforward and objective definition in rock music in anything like the same way it did in big band jazz, so it's merely a magnet for editwarring (at least one editor has already tried to make it go away by simply blanking it, even though they've been around more than long enough to know better than that, as well as reverting it back off a couple of people the creator had added it to) rather than a clear, objective or straightforward category. Bearcat (talk) 18:17, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lithium, Missouri

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I don't think we need a category for a village of 92 people (2020 census). The two articles of the category (beyond the main one) are churches, which are already categorized in Category:Churches in Perry County, Missouri. Pichpich (talk) 17:43, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Pichpich and I somehow managed to both hit this category at the same time — I was already formulating a deletion nomination on this on my own, but this one had duplicated mine by the time I was done. So just for the record, here's the rationale I used:

    Eponymous category for a small town (population less than 100 total) without enough related topics to need an eponymous category. As always, every populated place that exists does not automatically get its own eponymous category as a matter of course -- that's warranted for places that are large enough to have a lot of things to file in it, but is not an automatic feature of every place that exists. But apart from the eponym itself, the only other things filed here are two churches, which isn't enough to justify the creation of an eponymous category for the town.

    So obviously I also support deletion. Bearcat (talk) 17:47, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nominator.Lost in Quebec (talk) 18:37, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WWE RAW CONTROVERSIES

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Incorrectly named (why the all-caps?) category that is not defining of its contents. As it stands, the only thing here is List of WWE Raw guest stars, a thing which is not inherently "controversial" -- a few individual guest stars might have been controversial, but the basic phenomenon of guest stars is not a controversy at all, so a list of guest stars is not a "controversy" in and of itself. And the only other thing that was here is Category:WWE controversies, but that's had to be removed as it's a parent topic of this rather than a child subtopic -- and furthermore, since that category already exists, it's far from clear that this category would be needed alongside it: anything that was actually a WWE Raw controversy would, by definition, already be a WWE controversy to begin with, and that category is far from large enough to need exhaustive subcategorization for individual WWE events separately from the parent.
So this isn't necessary for just one thing that isn't even an actual controversy in the first place, and the existing parent category can already cover anything that actually is a controversy. Bearcat (talk) 17:37, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Update: A couple of other things have since been added to this category after this nomination was completed, but it's still not at all clear that either of them would specifically require a "WWE Raw controversies" category as opposed to the existing "WWE controversies" category either, one of them is just the venue where a controversial event that already has its own separate article happened rather than a controversy in its own right, and even if the category were to be kept it would still have to be renamed to get rid of the ridiculous and unwarranted all-capping. Bearcat (talk) 18:27, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Minors who completed medical affirmation

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: I don't really think this is a suitable topic for a category, we don't categorise others by whether or not they've had gender-affirming surgery, should we be classifying people who did when they were minors in this way? --woodensuperman 14:09, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comment: I note that this was created by a now blocked editor who was topic-banned for trans related editing. --woodensuperman 14:15, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Victoria's Secret Angels

[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: Speedy delete per G4. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:14, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Isn't modeliing by specific company just a WP:PERFCAT? --woodensuperman 13:43, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I’m going to have to disagree because for decades the Victoria's Secret Angels were notable on their own (they even collectively have a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame) and being an Angel was a defining characteristic of one’s modeling career by countless reliable sources. If you have 44 people in this category who were notable this way from the 90s-2020s I don’t see the need to delete. Trillfendi (talk) 15:27, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is an argument for notability of the article, not for categorisation. Note that this has actually been deleted multiple times before and therefore should actually be speedily deleted. You should have spotted this when you recreated it against consensus. This definitely falls foul of WP:PERFCAT, see this discussion. --woodensuperman 15:44, 13 March 2025 (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:Biopharmaceutical companies

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Biopharmaceuticals and pharmaceuticals are now rather synonymous. I recommend merging the two categories and distributing the companies into the appropriate country related categories. Chrisvanlang (talk) 13:43, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Pokamona

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Supected sock was banned or blocked last 6 years after created by Sir Sputnik 112.207.123.170 (talk) 13:06, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – no reason given for deletion. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:24, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Coke Studio (Pakistani TV program)

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Seems to be the same category, but with different names --woodensuperman 11:18, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Scherpenzeel, Gelderland

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:26, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Portuguese people by location and occupation

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now redundant category layer SMasonGarrison 03:31, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Gaborone by occupation

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge for now. Redundant category layer SMasonGarrison 03:02, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ambassadors of Kyrgyzstan to Jordan

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: upmerge this underpopulated category. I've already warned the category creator for making underpopulated categories like this. SMasonGarrison 02:15, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Support as per nom. LibStar (talk) 02:48, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Highest-scoring sports matches

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: A rename will make the purpose of these categories more explicit and better matches the current content. –Aidan721 (talk) 01:01, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Long words

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: WP:ARBITRARYCAT. How long does a word need to be to be considered long? (rhetorical) –Aidan721 (talk) 00:40, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Italian traumatologists

[edit]
Nominator's rationale: Only 1 entry. Also merge with Category:Italian surgeons. LibStar (talk) 00:02, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/Today&oldid=931652817"