Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 21

< January 20
January 22 >

January 21

Muay Thai practitioners

Nominator's rationale: Why is there only a single article in this category tree? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Paul_012's latest comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ukrainian sportspeople killed in the Russian invasion of Ukraine

Convert Category:Ukrainian sportspeople killed in the Russian invasion of Ukraine to article Sportspeople killed in the Russian invasion of Ukraine
Nominator's rationale: Shoft be listified. Non-defining Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_May_18#Category:Sportspeople_who_died_in_wars SMasonGarrison 15:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Possibly listify. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:08, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as it is defining according to the following "a defining characteristic is one that reliable, secondary sources commonly and consistently define, in prose, the subject as having....if the characteristic would not be appropriate to mention in the lead section of an article" Nayyn (talk)
That's not sufficient. The intersection needs to be defining, and the other case has covered the broader category. SMasonGarrison 00:46, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What does "Shoft be listified" mean?
This follows a category on Ukrainian Wikipedia.
What is not defining about this?
It feels personal @Smasongarrison as you've nominated at least 5 of my categories in the last weeks to be deleted.. Nayyn (talk) 19:11, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Should". It's not "personal", but I did look through your categories given the concerns I noticed seemed systematic. SMasonGarrison 00:45, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No evidence has been provided to demonstrate that it is a defining intersection; does such evidence exist? If not kept, should it be listified or deleted?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:42, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hart wrestling family books

Nominator's rationale: This category is mostly redirects, which I suggest removing from this category, and then upmerging the five remaining articles to Category:Professional wrestling books and either Category:Hart wrestling family or the rename to Category:Hart family (professional wrestling) nominated below. Mike Selinker (talk) 04:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Responses to Mike Selinker's most recent comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:33, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Itesot people

Nominator's rationale: Seem to cover same group of people ForsythiaJo (talk) 22:27, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jordanian male racewalkers

Nominator's rationale: also merge with Category:Jordanian male athletes. LibStar (talk) 22:21, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pro-Russian military personnel killed in the war in Donbas

Nominator's rationale: the articles about rebelling Ukrainians rather than Russian military. This is follow-up on this earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TSventon and Smasongarrison: pinging contributors to earlier discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:03, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm find with unconflating it as you've proposed. SMasonGarrison 01:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Emirati rabbis

Nominator's rationale: People who are Emirati (citizens of the United Arab Emirates) can not legally be recognized as Jews, as the law requires all citizens to be Muslim; all the people under this category are not Emiratis, they are Jews of other nationalities simply residing in the country. You can not gain citizenship through living there long enough or being born there (like the US for example). Sources: 1 2 3 4. I am voting to rename this category to reflect this. jolielover♥talk 17:20, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose renaming per marco and because this category is for nationality, not by country of work. SMasonGarrison 01:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rape of Persephone

Nominator's rationale: Most contents are overly broad for a specific Greek myth. In particular, this creates a category loop between this one and Category:Hades. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:35, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is renaming to Category:Cultural depictions of the rape of Persephone an acceptable alternative?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:09, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Government in/of X

Nominator's rationale: Redundant categories; in particular, this creates a category loop for Nigeria and between Category:Government in Quebec and Category:Politics of Quebec. For Canada, Nigeria, and South Africa, it is also possible to segregate the federal and state/provincial governments, like we do in the United States. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's and TadejM's comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:08, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Modernity

Nominator's rationale: Categories are too similar, and this is reflected by the fact that they form a category loop. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:45, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Have Grutness's actions rendered this moot? I will tag Category:Modern history to allow for a reverse merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Human-Environment interaction

Nominator's rationale: Overlap with Category:Environmental sociology (reflecting the target of Human-Environment interaction) and Category:Human impact on the environment. The ostensible main article is Integrated geography. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:56, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose- Human-Environment interaction is one of the Four traditions of geography, originally refered to as the "Man-Land tradition." It is also one of the Five themes of geography. It is a geography topic and is distinct from sociology. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 02:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Rename, Integrated Geography is the closest page we have to the topic, but the literature distinctly uses Human-Environment interaction. I'd support renaming hte integrated geography page before the category. If you look at Google Trends comparing "Integrated geography," "human-environment interaction," and for fun "human environment interaction" without the hyphen you can see it isn't even close. Integrated geography is the page name we have, and I didn't think it was necessary to change it, but it is not the more common term. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 19:45, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The capitalization is still wrong, however. The environment is not a proper noun. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: LaundryPizza03 seems to imply Category:Human-environment interaction; is that an acceptable rename target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:City

Nominator's rationale: Yet another questionable topic/set split. Part of the category loop Category:City → Category:Cities → Category:Metropolitan areas → Category:Urban areas, which will need to be broken — possibly by breaking the kink between "Metropolitan areas" and "Urban areas". –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not seeing an objection to merging; speak up if you do object :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Urban guerrilla warfare

Nominator's rationale: Also Category:Urban guerrilla warfare tactics, Category:Urban guerrilla warfare theorists. The Wiki article Urban guerrilla warfare was redirected to Guerrilla warfare in August 2024, which was probably a good call imo. (Ping User:czar who redirected it). However that leaves these orphaned categories without an article that Wikipedia needs to decide what to do with. Deletion seems like the course of action to me, but I don't know that much about categories. Prezbo (talk) 13:10, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arab supporters of Israel

Nominator's rationale: selectively merge, these are subcategories of Category:Arab supporters of Israel but Arab ethnicity does not coincide with nationality. E.g. Category:Moroccan Zionists contains two Jews and zero Arabs. Only include articles in the merge process if the article is clearly about someone of Arab ethnicity. This is follow-up on these earlier discussions 1 and 2.
  • Keep This nomination is backwards — the nationalities should not be subcategories of the Arab category, and should not be merged there because we could lose categorization for non-Arabs from these countries. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:24, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on LaundryPizza03's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:38, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ante-Nicene Christian martyrs

Nominator's rationale: per parent Category:Ancient Christian saints and Category:Ancient Christians. Also, the category tree contains articles well beyond the First Council of Nicaea. For example Abda and Abdisho died in 376. After the rename, Category:5th-century Christian martyrs can be added as a subcategory too. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: isn't there a distinct purpose in a category for Christians martyred prior to the widespread adoption of Christianity in the Roman Empire? I realize that the date for this is a bit fuzzy, but the Council of Nicaea seems as reasonable a date as any. Those martyred afterward would seem to have been martyred for different reasons—perhaps a case could be made for including those martyred by Romans who had yet to convert, though Abda and Abdisho apparently were martyred for a different reason and beyond Roman borders, so they and some others could probably be removed from this category.
Perhaps the solution could be a category titled "Ancient Christian martyrs" with a subcategory for Ante-Nicene martyrs, and which would separately include late Roman (or other) martyrs such as Abda and Abdisho. That would simply be a revision to the "martyr tree", so to speak. I note that I come at this from a non-Christian perspective; I am not particularly fond of the concept of martyrdom, but it is a valid topic in religious history, and it seems to make sense to distinguish between those who were martyred due to anti-Christian persecution by Romans and those martyred post-persecution elsewhere (*wonders if there are Post-Nicene pagan martyrs*). If this category is not preserved, then that distinction would be lost, and probably not to the benefit of the reader. P Aculeius (talk) 11:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are enough articles just mentioning a death in the 4th century without specifying whether it was before or after 325, so the distinction isn't clear anyway. Besides Christianity became an accepted religion quite a few years before Nicaea. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Before the reign of Constantine (312–337) Christianity was widely persecuted, so there would have been many Christians martyred within the Roman empire. Though various dates from 311 (edict of Serdica) to 337 (death, and alleged deathbed conversion of Constantine, who may or may not have adopted Christianity informally as early as 312) could be used, the council of Nicaea, which he convened in 325, is a significant date in establishing a degree of uniformity for Christian worship, and probably did more to promote its acceptance than dubious stories about the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. After this it would be rare for Christians to be martyred within the Roman Empire, though of course they could be anywhere else that Christianity wasn't yet tolerated or adopted, and would continue to be for centuries. So it makes good sense to distinguish martyrs before 325 and after—or at least martyrs due to Roman persecution, which probably did not end all at once as soon as some decree was issued at Rome, though it probably had by the end of Constantine's reign—from later martyrs elsewhere. P Aculeius (talk) 17:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • So what do you suggest we do with Category:4th-century Christian martyrs with its many articles not specifying a year or specifying a year after 325? Should this subcategory be purged? Marcocapelle (talk) 19:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        Since some of the contents of "4th-century Christian martyrs" are ante-Nicene, it can remain as a subcategory, the same as "Ford" could remain under "20th-century automobile manufacturers" even though it continues in business in the 21st century. Subcategories will often be partial matches for multiple parent categories. P Aculeius (talk) 21:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        • But then the difference with "Ancient" as proposed is only the 5th century. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
          Assuming that the 5th century topic includes the entire century, then "Ancient Christian martyrs" would cover a span of about 450 years—about 275 before Nicaea, 175 after. That doesn't seem unreasonable as a division of the span, since each group would tend to share certain characteristics—most ante-Nicene martyrs would have been martyred in the Roman Empire either as part of or inspired by official persecutions; post-Nicaea most Christian martyrs would have been martyred elsewhere or for other reasons. P Aculeius (talk) 17:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Lots of productive discussion (good!); what does that mean for this category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:26, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Maritime disasters in Kent

Nominator's rationale: Merge with parent category because I'm not sure if this has anything to do directly with Kent. The waters off Kent or near it but not with it. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:32, 10 January 2025 (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, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:24, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Black feminists

Nominator's rationale: I'm on the fence between deletion and renaming. SMasonGarrison 01:23, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per various CfD's for the deletion of Category:Black people. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:52, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte 👸♥ 20:16, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Category:Black_feminism is its own concept, it's not simply being of African descendent. Why can Category:Jewish feminists use people-first language but cherrypicking/drawing the line at black feminism? LIrala (talk) 02:44, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on LIrala's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Intersectional feminists

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between being a feminist and a type of feminism. At the very least, the child categories need to be purged/restored to the parent category. For example, being a Jewish feminist doesn't mean that they're an intersectional feminist. SMasonGarrison 01:21, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: merge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte 👸♥ 20:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this is a very consistent type of feminism. LIrala (talk) 02:38, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on LIrala's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:10, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fadrique family

Nominator's rationale: delete, largely overlapping with Category:Counts of Salona. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Cplakidas's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:09, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Visualization (research)

Nominator's rationale: Misuse of disambiguator. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:38, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, Category:Visualization (research) is incoherent and should be deleted instead. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:53, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Marcocapelle's most recent point?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:00, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anti-modernist films

Nominator's rationale: delete, the scope of the category is too vague. I don't think the parenting is correct either. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:00, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scientists from Arlington, Texas

Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Also merge to Scientists from Texas. Lost in Quebec (talk) 17:37, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disestablishments in the Habsburg Netherlands

Nominator's rationale: Merge disestablishments, as sparsely-populated categories, following the precedent for establishments in the same territory at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 16#Establishments in the Habsburg Netherlands by year. – Fayenatic London 15:35, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Güzelyurt

Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Lost in Quebec (talk) 11:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Greek world record setters in athletics (track and field)

Nominator's rationale: Complete outlier that has flown under radar for 8 years, no other split by nationality in World Record categories Crowsus (talk) 09:34, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Shadow fleets

Nominator's rationale: Is this category necessary? The only non-eponymous article is linked from the eponymous article. Gjs238 (talk) 01:33, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Possibly fictional people from Europe

Nominator's rationale: parent is People whose existence is disputed. The current name is inconsistent. See conversation on the talk page for context from the creator: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Possibly_fictional_people_from_Europe SMasonGarrison 04:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updated: Add other country/continents as renames. I've added the relevant existing legendary child categories if they exist. SMasonGarrison 18:18, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am seeing at best lukewarm support for the new name, but there is clear consensus that a change is needed. Does jc37's Category:Legendary X people suggestion work for people?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:50, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support "X people whose existence is disputed". I don't think "Legendary X people" is suitable for many of the entries currently in this category tree: e.g. Diotima of Mantinea was either a real person or a fictional character; Metrodora is either a real person, a pseudonym, or the result of a misinterpreted text. Neither has the folkloric component which I associate with a legend. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 22:12, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relist also clears out an old CfD log page
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:30, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - So, based on comments above, this cat includes those who would be considered legendary, and those who would not be considered legendary? Then, those that are the former are an easy merge (as I noted above). The latter then should be listified due to (among other things) the many various ambiguities noted above. - jc37 11:23, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Maghrebian people stubs

Nominator's rationale: Underpopulated stub category, not approved by WikiProject stub sorting. As always, stub categories are not free for just any user to create on a whim for just any topic of their choosing -- a stub category requires at least 60 articles in it before it can be created, so its creation has to be authorized by the WikiProject in order to ensure that there are actually enough articles to justify it.
But this didn't go through the proper process, and has only one article in it with little prospect of finding 59 others -- the Maghreb is a multi-country region in northwest Africa, meaning that almost any potential entries for this would already be tagged for a specific country ({{Algeria-bio-stub}}, {{Tunisia-bio-stub}}, {{Morocco-bio-stub}}, etc.) anyway. (There were two other people here when I first found it, but one was reclassifiable as Algeria and one wasn't a stub at all, and three still isn't 60 anyway.)
And even the template is of questionable necessity if it can't support its own dedicated category -- the one article here just describes the subject as Maghrebi without containing any more specific information about where in the Maghreb he came from (and thus can't be reclassified to a specific Maghreb country), so the template would be defensible if somebody's got a good idea for where else it can upfile him to. But I'm still bundling it here for the sake of discussion, and it can't have its own dedicated category without at least 59 more people than this. Bearcat (talk) 16:09, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Bearcat
The category can accommodate more than 60 articles easy. Its primary purpose is to address and prevent the non-editing conflicts between Algerian and Moroccan contributors regarding the term "مغربي" (Maghrebi), which is often mistranslated as "Moroccan."
It is not historically accurate to use labels such as Algerian, Moroccan, or Tunisian for people who lived before the establishment of these states. Historically, the people of the Maghreb region traveled and settled and served in various cities across the region, making clarification in such cases impossible.
The correct and most appropriate category for these individuals is Maghrebian people. Both Western and Arabic sources consistently use the terms "Maghrebi" or "North African" to describe individuals from this region, rather than the modern labels of Algerian, Moroccan, or Tunisian, which are relatively recent and impossible to adopt here.
So I created this category is to ensure historical precision and avoid misclassification. There is no valid way to attribute people from the Maghreb to modern-day countries, especially for periods before the 17th century. This category provides an accurate and neutral way to represent those people. Riad Salih (talk) 16:23, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not enough to simply assert that it "can accommodate" 60 articles it if it doesn't actually have 60 articles in it now — any category "can accommodate" any number of articles by definition, but that isn't in and of itself proof that we actually have enough articles for it. So it's not a question of what might be theoretically possible, it's a question of how much content is actually in the category now. And you're not free to just create new stub categories yourself without following the proper process, either.
So if you want the category to exist, then your job is to (a) follow the proper process of getting it approved by the WikiProject first, and (b) ensure that it already has at least 60 articles in it the moment I see it in the first place.Bearcat (talk) 16:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They are often randomly labeled as Algerian, Moroccan, Tunisian, etc., depending on the conflicts between countries, each of which claims belonging to modern nations. A reclassification would certainly have more than 60 possible entries. The North African wikiprojects are rarely active to not say dead so Wikipedia:Be bold. Riad Salih (talk) 16:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's the stub sorting WikiProject that has to approve stub categories, not the North African wikiprojects, so the deadness of the North African wikiprojects isn't a legitimate reason to bypass proposing a stub category to the stub sorting wikiproject first. Bearcat (talk) 16:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest I dont think that the stub sorting WikiProject can effectively deal with this without involments from editors very knowledgeable about North Africa region or those directly concerned with the region. However, I would have greatly appreciated if you had initiated a discussion instead of directly proposing deletion or modifying the stubs in the articles. Given the long-standing edit wars surrounding these topics, I saw it both logical and necessary to focus on a clear categorization. Riad Salih (talk) 16:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:24, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mint food

Nominator's rationale: Borderline c2c, but I'm not sure this category should exist. But if it should it should be renamed based on siblings in Prepared foods by main ingredient look like Fruit dishes SMasonGarrison 13:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps a split into mint dishes and mint drinks? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:59, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quelle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_January_21