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 (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:32, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Back at the Barnyard to Category:Barnyard (franchise)

Nominator's rationale: Actually, Back at the Barnyard is the name of the television series based on the film, so Barnyard would be the correct title. ApuNahasapeemapetilon1989 (talk) 22:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:15, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. (Oinkers42) (talk) 04:30, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:09, 9 June 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 result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:32, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Eyewear people ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining. Mason (talk) 21:43, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It is unclear what this is supposed to be. Actual contents are mostly businesspeople that sell eyewear. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:17, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, only Hardy and Roth seem to belong in the category and they are in the tree of Category:Eyewear anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:23, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:08, 9 June 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 result of the discussion was: no consensus on Category:People by city in Burundi; delete Category:Categories by city in Burundi. Anyone wishing to pursue the merger of Category:People by city in Burundi is welcome to create a new discussion. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:21, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Categories by city in Burundi ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose merging Category:People by city in Burundi to Category:Burundian people

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge this category is a redundant layer. Mason (talk) 21:25, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:24, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Changing to delete the first based on Fayenatic london's observation below. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the first, Keep the second, because the subcat Category:People from Bujumbura belongs within its other parent Category:People by city, and the latter is currently entirely diffused by country. If not kept, merge to that target also. – Fayenatic London 09:10, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I have also added another subcat People from Gitega. – Fayenatic London 09:10, 7 June 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 result of the discussion was: merge. This is a sprawling discussion, but without any policy/guideline to supplement the WP:1AM opposition (and/or discount the proponents' arguments), it would be supervoting to close as anything but in favor of the 3–1 majority. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:15, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 by state to Category:Battles of the War of 1812
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Alabama‎ (13 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Alabama
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Connecticut‎ (2 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Connecticut
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Delaware‎ (1 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Delaware
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Florida‎ (1 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Florida
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Georgia (U.S. state)‎ (3 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Georgia (U.S. state)
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Illinois‎ (4 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Illinois
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Indiana‎ (9 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Indiana
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Iowa‎ (1 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Iowa
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Louisiana‎ (1 C, 3 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Louisiana
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Maine‎ (1 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Maine
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Maryland‎ (6 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Maryland
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Michigan‎ (6 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Michigan
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Missouri‎ (1 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Missouri
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in New York (state)‎ (12 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of New York (state)
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Ohio‎ (5 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Ohio
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Virginia‎ (4 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Virginia
  • Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Wisconsin‎ (1 P) to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and Category:Military history of Wisconsin
• Propose upmerging Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in the United States to Category:Battles of the War of 1812 (now 2 C; redundant layer if those above are upmerged)

Nominator's rationale: WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN. See also recent precedents, e.g. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 24#Battles by location in Germany. NLeeuw (talk) 17:11, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping @Marcocapelle follow-up FYI. NLeeuw (talk) 17:40, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:41, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom, per precedent. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• do not merge The purpose of categories is to improve navigation to articles by the reader. Logical/historical groups (categories) help such navigation; long lists of ungrouped articles do not. Not once in the nomination or agreements is there any mention how this change will help improve reader navigation. This should be rejected on its face. Previous actions of this sort should be re-examined and reversed. When lists are needed, list articles can be created without wholesale elimination of helpful category structures. Both lists and categories are a necessary part of WP navigation. There is no benefit to WP by warring on categories. Hmains (talk) 00:13, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  long lists of ungrouped articles By upmerging, the Category:Battles of the War of 1812 will contain 79 articles. That is not "long". Only when a category exceeds 200 articles, they cannot be displayed in a single view. WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN explains all the relevant reasons why "battles in [location]" categories should not exist. Several precedents cited above demonstrate that there is a consensus to phase out such categories by merging or renaming them to "military history of X" categories.

  Example: Category:Military history of Delaware is almost completely empty right now, so adding 1 article, Bombardment of Lewes, to it is completely fine. What is not helpful for navigation is forcing the reader to dig through a needlessly long and cumbersome tunnel: Category:Military history of Delaware > Category:Battles in Delaware > Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in Delaware > Bombardment of Lewes. Could you explain to me how this is a necessary part of WP navigation? NLeeuw (talk) 10:35, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • While one may invent a personal rule that more than 200 entries is 'long', such a numbers rule is nowhere found in the WP rules for considering ease of navigation (creating categories). Instead of exampling the tiny state (Delaware) that had exactly one battle in the War of 1812, one should example the impact to other, more consequential, states and see the negative impact there to their parent categories and thus the true negative impact of this proposal. Consider New York state: Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in New York (state) with 12 articles. If this category were to be deleted, that means all 12 articles would be placed directly into the parent Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in New York (state) and alphabetically mixed into these articles: Henry Eckford (shipbuilder), Pike's Cantonment Site, Plattsburgh Bay, Sackets Harbor, New York and Veteran Corps of Artillery. Likewise, these 12 articles would be placed directly into Category:Battles in New York (state) and alphabetically mixed into its 14 existing articles on various other battles that occurred into New York state. Now consider the WP reader who is using categories and who wants to see any or all articles on War of 1812 battles in New York state. Getting to Category:Battles in New York (state), the reader must open each of the then 28 articles to discover what they want. And similarly with other consequential states. And since this proposal is to completely put all 79 battles into Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and thus eliminate their geographic location as battles of the War of 1812, it just gets worse and worse. Geography is important to history; it is not to be disregarded and discarded as un- tasty or otherwise in the way. There is no way this proposal can even be under consideration as helpful to the user navigation: it directly negates and destroys the category navigation purposes and structures of WP. The purpose of WP categories is to make things easier for readers, not more difficult, not just following a misreading of some other editors' discussions. Hmains (talk) 22:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Geography is important to history; it is not to be disregarded and discarded. We are not discarding geography at all; we are putting them all in categories of military history by state. What we're getting rid of is a jungle of categories that are unhelpful for navigation.

    Consider New York state: Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in New York (state) with 12 articles. If this category were to be deleted, that means all 12 articles would be placed directly into the parent Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in New York (state) and alphabetically mixed into these articles: Henry Eckford (shipbuilder), Pike's Cantonment Site, Plattsburgh Bay, Sackets Harbor, New York and Veteran Corps of Artillery. No, they would not. What makes you think that? The proposal is to upmerge these 12 articles to both Category:Military history of New York (state) and Category:Battles of the War of 1812. Could you please re-read the proposal carefully? Because you appear to be opposing something that is nobody is suggesting. NLeeuw (talk) 21:37, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    First, I need to correct my last post that should be read:

While one may invent a personal rule that more than 200 entries is 'long', such a numbers rule is nowhere found in the WP rules for considering ease of navigation (creating categories). Instead of exampling the tiny state (Delaware) that had exactly one battle in the War of 1812, one should example the impact to other, more consequential, states and see the negative impact there to their parent categories and thus the true negative impact of this proposal. Consider New York state: Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in New York (state) with 12 articles. If this category were to be deleted, that means all 12 articles would be placed directly into the parent Category:New York (state) in the War of 1812 and alphabetically mixed into these articles: Henry Eckford (shipbuilder), Pike's Cantonment Site, Plattsburgh Bay, Sackets Harbor, New York and Veteran Corps of Artillery. Likewise, these 12 articles would be placed directly into Category:Battles in New York (state) and alphabetically mixed into its 14 existing articles on various other battles that occurred into New York state. Now consider the WP reader who is using categories and who wants to see any or all articles on War of 1812 battles in New York state. Getting to Category:Battles in New York (state), the reader must open each of the then 28 articles to discover what they want. And similarly with other consequential states. And since this proposal is to completely put all 79 battles into Category:Battles of the War of 1812 and thus eliminate their geographic location as battles of the War of 1812, it just gets worse and worse. Geography is important to history; it is not to be disregarded and discarded as un- tasty or otherwise in the way. There is no way this proposal can even be under consideration as helpful to the user navigation: it directly negates and destroys the category navigation purposes and structures of WP. The purpose of WP categories is to make things easier for readers, not more difficult, not just following a misreading of some other editors' discussions.

Next, what is being proposed here is exactly what I wrote: eliminate the existing category structure that allows readers to quickly find all the battles of 1812 in New York State in one location (Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in New York (state)) without having to wade through and open n-number of extraneous articles just to find what they want--not to force each reader to make connections by taking information from one category Category:Military history of New York (state) and mindfully merging it with information from another category Category:Battles of the War of 1812. Such is the very purpose (and always has been) of categories (doing something once so each reader with each read does not have to do so), something the proposal would destroy by deleting Category:Battles of the War of 1812 in New York (state) and all similar categories--for no valid reader-oriented reason. If flat lists are wanted, then the WP solution is to create simple list articles--simple to do. The job of editors is NOT to presume they know how readers will look for information and limit WP to provide for that single presumption, but to provide various means that various readers of various thoughts and tastes may easily find what they want. This is what WP has always tried to do. Hmains (talk) 00:27, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about you help me rewrite Timeline of the War of 1812? I've merged all the battles into it, and have begun to integrate them and their descriptions into the existing tables. The new columns Theater and Notes allow us to state on which front or in which domain an event or battle took place, while the Notes allow us to give a bit more detail (such as location, intentions, results, losses etc.). Readers could easily find where a battle took place if we fill out these tables completely, especially by using the sort buttons. This overview will be able to do everything better than the elaborate subdivision of battles by location in sub-sub-sub-categories ever could. NLeeuw (talk) 15:06, 12 June 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 result of the discussion was: rename (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Beauty pageants for people of specific ethnic or national descents to Category:Beauty pageants for people of specific descents
• Propose renaming Category:Politicians by ethnic or national descent to Category:Politicians by descent
• Propose renaming Category:American politicians by ethnic or national origin to Category:American politicians by descent
• Propose renaming Category:Members of the United States Congress by ethnic or national origin to Category:Members of the United States Congress by descent
• Propose renaming Category:American people by occupation and ethnic or national origin to Category:American people by occupation and descent
• Propose renaming Category:American people by ethnic or national origin and occupation to Category:American people by descent and occupation

Nominator's rationale: all subcategories in Category:People by descent are named "by descent", there is no reason to name these categories differently. Aldij (talk) 15:43, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:20, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:04, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:09, 9 June 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 result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:People associated with the Institute for Cultural Research ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:DEFINING. I looked at four articles in this category. None mentioned The Institute for Cultural Research. Daask (talk) 14:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, we don't categorize people by association anyway, per WP:OCASSOC. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:21, 6 June 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 result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Cornish people of Irish descent ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Irish people in Great Britain is already in the categories 'Irish diaspora in the United Kingdom' and 'British people of Irish descent'. Aldij (talk) 14:00, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, there is only one article in this category and it does not match. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• delete: redundant and not particularly useful, per above. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 07:12, 7 June 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 result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Chief Ministers of Anguilla to Category:Premiers of Anguilla

Nominator's rationale: Up until 2019 the office was known as Chief Minister of Anguilla, but the Anguilla Constitution (Amendment) Order 2019 renamed the position as Premier. Aldij (talk) 12:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge, presuming it is just a name change of the office and nothing else. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:26, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect. – Fayenatic London 09:12, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, redirecting is certainly a good idea. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:25, 7 June 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 result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:37, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Baptist Bible College & Seminary alumni ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Propose deleting Category:Clarks Summit University ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only 1 member as a notable alumnus. I have listed him along with 2 faculty members in the article Clarks Summit University. – Fayenatic London 11:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• I have added the parent Category:Clarks Summit University which would then be a case of WP:C2F. No merging is needed. – Fayenatic London 08:28, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, that is an obvious consequence. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:31, 7 June 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 result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:24, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Mistresses of Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orléans to Category:Mistresses of French royalty

Nominator's rationale: Only sovereigns have mistresses categories, even then when there sufficient enough to warrent it. Only two articles in this. Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge, only two articles in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:24, 6 June 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 result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:24, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Mistresses of Frederick, Prince of Wales to Category:Mistresses of British royalty

Nominator's rationale: Only sovereigns have categories for mistresses. In any case, there are only two articles (confirmed mistresses) in this category. Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Ok, it is a very small category, but it's news to me that only sovereigns have categories for mistresses. Where is Wikipedia policy on this? PatGallacher (talk) 13:48, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PatGallacher, it's just an observation, I wasn't stating any rule. Every such category belongs to a sovereign of a nation except for two, both of which are small (only two articles each). I personally think these particular categories (for mistresses) should be limited to sovereigns who were known for having many mistresses. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:33, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We do have mistresses of John F. Kennedy, Julius Caesar and Benito Mussolini. PatGallacher (talk) 16:11, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PatGallacher, sorry I meant for royalty. We can't create categories for any male royal known to keep mistresses. Its best to keep royal mistresses categories for specific royals to sovereigns while the rest can be sorted into Category:Mistresses of British royalty. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:44, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge, only two articles in the category, this is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:25, 6 June 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 result of the discussion was: triple merge to Category:Fast & Furious, Category:American film-related lists, and Category:NBCUniversal-related lists. (non-admin closure) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:42, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Fast & Furious lists to Category:Fast & Furious

Nominator's rationale: No need for a cat that has two articles. It can be safely upmerged and individual articles can be merged up to any other relevant cats. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:37, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to relevant categories the nominator's reasoning makes logical sense. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Koavf: shouldn't it also be merged to Category:American film-related lists and Category:NBCUniversal-related lists? Marcocapelle (talk) 17:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Sure, those are relevant cats. I like it. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:38, 6 June 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 result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:25, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Books by Ivar Hippe ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Unhelpful for navigation. There's no epon parent category and only one book in here. Mason (talk) 04:55, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:10, 9 June 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 result of the discussion was: merge. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:25, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose upmerging Category:Aerial operations and battles of World War II involving the Netherlands (1 P) to
  • Category:Aerial operations and battles involving the Netherlands
  • Category:Battles and operations of World War II involving the Netherlands
  • Category:Aerial operations and battles of World War II

Nominator's rationale: 1 P, 0 C. Triple upmerge for now. NLeeuw (talk) 04:51, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Dual merge, merging to Category:Aerial operations and battles of World War II is not necessary because the article is in a British subcategory of it. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Agreed. NLeeuw (talk) 06:30, 6 June 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 result of the discussion was: merge and delete. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Futurist photography ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose merging Category:Futurist photographers to Category:Futurist artists

Nominator's rationale: There's only one person in this entire category tree. The parent category (Futurist photography) only contains this category. Mason (talk) 02:26, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge/delete per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 06:31, 6 June 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 result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Russian Futurist composers to Category:Futurist composers and Category:20th-century Russian composers

Nominator's rationale: Duel merge for now. this category is really narrow and the parent category (Futurist composers ) isn't in need to diffusion yet. Mason (talk) 02:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:29, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 06:31, 6 June 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 result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Modernist women composers ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Narrow category at the intersection of occupation, gender, and specific movement. The only person in the category is already in the right parent categories Mason (talk) 02:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, presumably also per WP:OCEGRS. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:31, 6 June 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 result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Climate change filmmakers ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Narrow intersection Mason (talk) 02:17, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, one article isn't really about a filmmaker, the other article isn't really about climate change. I do not have a conceptual objection to the category though. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:34, 6 June 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 result of the discussion was: merge (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:21st-century Polish cinematographers to Category:Polish cinematographers

Nominator's rationale: The norm has been that modern professions like modeling, cinematographers, etc aren't diffused by century. Mason (talk) 02:16, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:35, 6 June 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 result of the discussion was: merge. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:28, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Landforms of Akmola Region to Category:Geography of Akmola Region
• Propose merging Category:Landforms of North Kazakhstan Region to Category:Geography of North Kazakhstan Region
• Propose merging Category:Theatres in Kazakhstan by city to Category:Theatres in Kazakhstan
• Propose merging Category:Hotels in Kazakhstan by city to Category:Hotels in Kazakhstan
• Propose deleting Category:Kazakhstani culture by region ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose merging Category:Religious buildings and structures in Kazakhstan by city to Category:Religious buildings and structures in Kazakhstan
• Propose deleting Category:Economy of Kokshetau ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: So many redundant categories made (mostly) by the same user. Mason (talk) 00:10, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge, redundant category layers with only one subcategory each. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:37, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 06:32, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:11, 9 June 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.