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_November_17

November 17

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:James Bond articles up for deletion

Propose deleting Category:James Bond articles up for deletion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category isn't helpful anymore as it doesn't track current issues relevant to the project but anything that was ever sent to AfD. For current issues, we have Article Alerts which notifies projects about pages sent to AfD. Gonnym (talk) 15:17, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional kenjutsuka

Propose merging Category:Fictional kenjutsuka to Category:Fictional swordfighters

Nominator's rationale: It is unclear how the page creator arrived at the conclusion that these characters practice "Japanese swordsmanship" beyond the fact that they use a katana. It seems to be original research. That they use swords is not as up for debate, however. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:24, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Landsverk

Propose merging Category:Landsverk to Category:Economic history of Landskrona

Nominator's rationale: selectively merge, the category only contains the main article and a very broad topic article, not specifically about Landsverk. The subcategory suffices and can be moved to Category:Economic history of Landskrona. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:00, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:History of transport in Landskrona

Propose diffusing Category:History of transport in Landskrona (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: diffuse, except for the one article this isn't really about history of transport. Move the article to Category:Transport in Landskrona and move the ships built subcategory to Category:Economic history of Landskrona. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:48, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People by paranormal abilities

Propose renaming Category:People by paranormal abilities to Category:People by purported paranormal ability

Nominator's rationale: The current title of this category suggests the abilities are real. Given that these abilities have never been scientifically proven, it should specify they are alleged. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:14, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Individual heroes and heroines

Propose deleting Category:Individual heroes and heroines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Recently created category with obvious WP:POV issues. Declaring real people to be "heroes" in general (not just recipients of some subjective award from a national POV) is inherently controversial. Will Armenians be OK with this being a parent to Category:National Heroes of Azerbaijan? Will Palestinians be OK with recipients of the Hero of Israel being here? Will the recipients of the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross or Hero of the Soviet Union be included? The previously existing Category:Heroes is limited to fiction and legend to avoid this problem. See also the comments in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of heroes by country and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of heroes. RL0919 (talk) 06:57, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, far too subjective. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:08, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Blatantly violates WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. Yes, "hero" is highly subjective (as opposed to simply recipients of awards). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional Ninjutsu practitioners

Propose merging Category:Fictional Ninjutsu practitioners to Category:Fictional ninja

Nominator's rationale: Can this really be separated from ninja in an obvious way? Due to extreme WP:OVERLAPCAT, I suggest selectively merging and any who do not apply should be upmerged to Category:Fictional practitioners of Japanese martial arts instead. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:47, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary Category:Fictional ninja should be deleted, merged or heavily purged. Ninja is a military (secret service) occupation in the 12th- to 17th-century empire of Japan, not a martial sports, and most articles in that category do not fit the concept. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:20, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The popular culture definition of "ninja" is "anyone who practices Ninjutsu-like skills". You are referring to a far more narrow, real-life definition of it, which makes sense for actual people but not for fictional characters. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:17, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- If that is the case, a reverse merge is also an option, just to avoid confusion with the real-life definition. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:16, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  The two have very different definitions when you contrast real-life ninja with fictional ones, as can be seen here. I think that "ninja" is still the most WP:CONCISE way to describe such a character archetype. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tyrant flycatcher stubs

Propose renaming Category:Tyrant flycatcher stubs to Category:Tyrannidae stubs

Nominator's rationale: The use of the English name for this category seems silly. Tyrannidae is easier to type out; the template is named Template:Tyrannidae-stub, not Template:Tyrant-flycatcher-stub; everything in this category is supposed to be there because of the template; and most of these categories use the scientific name, including every other subcategory of Category:Tyranni stubs. Grey Clownfish (talk) 06:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Melee weapons

Propose merging Category:Melee weapons to Category:Weapons

Nominator's rationale: Given melee weapon was deleted, this category in itself is facing a crisis. I suggest a merge for any applicable articles, as it is no longer a viable means to categorize things. This also includes any subcategories reading "melee weapons" to be merged into their respective nation subcategory. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, if merged then manually merge because quite a few entries are already in some other subcategory of Category:Weapons. Also, it is probably appropriate to add Category:Indian melee weapons and other country subcategories to this nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:39, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zxcvbnm: are you okay with adding the country subcategories to the nomination? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:29, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will add the countries to the nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:43, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Chinese melee weapons to Category:Weapons of China, Category:Chinese martial arts
Propose merging Category:Filipino melee weapons to Category:Weapons of the Philippines, Category:Philippine martial arts
Propose merging Category:Indian melee weapons to Category:Weapons of India, Category:Indian martial arts
Propose merging Category:Iranian melee weapons to Category:Weapons of Iran, Category:Iranian martial arts
Propose merging Category:Japanese melee weapons to Category:Japanese martial arts, Category:Weapons of Japan
Propose merging Category:Vietnamese melee weapons to Category:Vietnamese martial arts, Category:Weapons of Vietnam

Adding to the nomination; no opinion on the merits. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:50, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Languages written in Latin script

Propose deleting Category:Languages written in Latin script (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category, as one that is a decade old, is not even implemented correctly; currently, it is more dependent on subcategories than pages in the category itself, but even then some languages like Indonesian or Filipino aren't even included there. However this trait should not be defining because Latin is the most common writing system. This category still does contain some languages that aren't written in the Latin script by standard, such as Hassaniya Arabic or Meitei, but I don't think trait is defining either. Other categories under Category:Languages by script may be kept, or maybe they'll be deleted as if writing systems as a whole are not defining. You decide. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 05:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the problem for including per-language subcategories as members rather than pages? In fact there should not even be any "page" (i.e. Galeries on Commons). Galeries are not relevant very for languages that have many aspects.

That category is relevant especially for languages that are commonly written with several scripts, and there's a need to subcategories per script (Latin being one of them), and then properly index the contents written in each script (so not all per-language categories need to be members, as most languages have a default script and there's still no need to distinguish them; but that's not even treu for English which is multiscript, even if Latin is its default).

This category should just be fed (very slowly) according to the IANA or CLDR databases and their related use in BCP 47 where categorizing per script is needed: if we categorize English written in Deseret, and list English as a member of "Language written in Deseret script", then we still need to list it also as member of "Languages written in Deseret script". As well we cannot assume a single script in many languages (not even Arabic! Which is also written in the Latin script in some wellknown Arabic variants, and for which case we have distinctive contents in Commons, that we do not want to mix with other Arabic-Arabic contents where we'll have difficulties to locales Arabic-Latin contents, jsut like we'll have difficutlies to locate English-Deserrt contents if they are all mixed deeply within English-Latin contents.)

Even if the Latin script is the most widely used one in the world, we don't want to place any image in that Category:Languages written in Latin script. All that is designed is to have subcategoeies members (and notably languages that are known to be written in mutliple scripts). We don't need per-language galeries as members (even if there are a few ones, these galeries should just be members of their own category to be listed as members). So that category should only contain subcategories, not galeries, not files for images/logos/symbols/audio/video that all should be placed in relevant subcategories of the per-language category (and possibly of the language-script combination category). Commons is not a videogame to play with for your convenience in Antarctica, it is for educational purpose.

Your statement also about "Hassaniya Arabic" is wrong: it is also written in the Latin script (as a standard in a wellknown country where it replaces the Arabic script in frequent cases). The same remark applies to Meitei (as written in Assam where the Latin script more common than the Meitei Mayek script for that language, even if it is not recognized officially, just because the language itself is still not recognized locally in order to promote the Bengali-Assamese script). It is a clear sign that you make this deleteion requrest based on false unchecked assumptions about how languages are written. And this is perfectly why such category by script is useful: it helps collecting facts that are countering such false assumptions, and make these facts more visible and easier to locate. This category will then grow very slowly but surely as needed as we get medias about them and categorize them properly to avoid them being lost in the mass where your assumption takes its root. Commons is especially useful when it collects medias that are otherwise difficult to find and study.

The fact that this categotry is "old" is not relevantat all as a criteria for deletion. The fact it has few members and thuis count progresses very slowly is aldo not relevant at all (this is per design), and this does not hurt at all but improves the indexing of Commons, to distinguish contents per language-script and locate them correctly (by helping finding language-script combinations when they are more rare and precious). verdy_p (talk) 07:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request: Can you please be more concise? This is a lot of text to ask volunteers to dig through. ^SMason_Garrison 16:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If kept, the category can better be re-purposed to Category:Languages sometimes written in Latin script or Category:Languages not originally written in Latin script as seems to be the intention of the category anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:21, 10 November 2024 (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, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:41, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional males by franchise

Propose deleting Category:Fictional males by franchise (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Fictional females by franchise (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Few to none of the things in here qualify as a franchise, making this category misleading. Made by a blocked user. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; there may be a slight imprecision, but these categories work fine. – Fayenatic London 09:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is not a "slight" imprecision, as almost none are a franchise (besides maybe Bond girls). Most refer to a company instead or are unfitting to belong in the category. I will say that some, like the comics ones, might have to be merged into Category:Fictional females. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:16, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment These seem to be subdivisions by publishing company instead of media franchise. Dimadick (talk) 19:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Fictional males and Category:Fictional females, some subcategories are by company, but it is a hodgepodge altogether. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:09, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If not kept, merge? Dimadick seems to imply a rename? Still no consensus to change anything... thoughts and further comments?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If renamed, then purge the subcategories that are not by company. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Demon superheroes

Propose merging Category:Demon superheroes to Category:Fictional demons
Propose merging Category:Demon supervillains to Category:Fictional demons

Nominator's rationale: The combination of demon and superhero does not appear to be defining, at least without evidence that it is. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, as these seem to be useful divisions of Category:Superheroes by type / Category:Supervillains by type. – Fayenatic London 09:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep We do not require "evidence" for category subdivisions. This is not a police investigation. Dimadick (talk) 19:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CATDEF states that reliable sources must "commonly and consistently refer to [the defining characteristic] in describing the topic", so it absolutely needs some sort of proof that RS single out demonic superheroes and villains as a class of their own. A pithy comment like calling it an investigation doesn't suddenly make it follow the Wikipedia policies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:05, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Zxcvbnm's latest comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:17, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Zxcvbnm, and it is also entirely obvious that demons have superpowers. But merge manually because most articles will already be in some other subcategory of Category:Fictional demons. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:37, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Serious games

Propose merging Category:Serious games to Category:Educational video games

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining/overlapping ^SMason_Garrison 12:39, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It is defining, as it has its own main article serious game. It's also not overlapping, and I am not sure that it should be a subcategory of educational game as it is now, but in Category:Video games by genre instead as its own genre as it can encompass things like training, activism, etc. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:59, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on zxcvbnm's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:15, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tiziano Ferro redirects

Propose deleting Category:Tiziano Ferro album redirects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Tiziano Ferro song redirects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: There are no album or song redirect schemes such as there is for television episodes (e.g. Category:Episode redirects to lists). Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 23:29, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then there are tens of thousands of these redirects in Category:Redirects from songs that really should be further organized in some way, for maintenance purposes if nothing else. I have been working with the songs, albums and redirects of this artist and have found it helpful to organize the dozens of related redirects. I don't see the need for deletion, and actually I'm encouraged to create a scheme.— TAnthony^Talk 23:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But assuming this idea will horrify the music redirect community, I can accept a consolidation to Category:Tiziano Ferro redirects.— TAnthony^Talk 23:50, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Find it helpful for what? What are you looking for by categorizing variations on the title of L'amore è una cosa semplice created as redirects? Any actual redirects (not misspellings, miscapitalizations, etc.) for albums or songs that are listed in the discography or track listing can be merged to the parent albums/songs category. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 06:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unless there is a maintenance process defined. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:56, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I admit I do not understand what Marcocapelle means by a "maintenance process" – what would you like to see in order to support keeping/merging the categories? If you support keeping/merging the category, is that something that can happen?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replying to relister: User:TAnthony argued that the category should be kept for "maintenance purposes". Then my question is: what sort of maintenance process is in place here? If there is no answer to this question the category can be deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:14, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there an answer to Marcocapelle's question?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:57, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Restaurants in Hoboken, New Jersey

Propose merging Category:Restaurants in Hoboken, New Jersey to Category:Restaurants in New Jersey

Nominator's rationale: Category with just two entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:03, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:39, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep has four entries.Djflem (talk) 13:55, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One of which is a redirect.Lost in Quebec (talk) 21:39, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Five entries (one of which is a redirect) as of relisting. Is that enough to keep the category?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes...Djflem (talk) 20:37, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above relisting comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lost in Quebec and Marcocapelle: thoughts? House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:56, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Celtic stone heads

Propose renaming Category:Celtic stone heads to Category:Celtic stone idols

Nominator's rationale: Move to Celtic stone idols, as per recently created article that widens scope. Ceoil (talk) 02:38, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename, aligning with article title. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:41, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American slave trade

Propose merging Category:American slave trade to Category:Slavery in the Americas

Nominator's rationale: Seems to cover the same scope BaduFerreira (talk) 20:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is about slave trade so it is more specific than slavery. However it is questionable if diffusion by continent makes a lot of sense, see the content of Category:African slave trade. I would rather propose to merge all continent categories to Category:Slave trade. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I meanwhile moved the European subcategories from Africa to Europe. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:18, 17 November 2024 (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, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lean oppose. Per Marco Procedurally, the merge target is too broad. ^SMason_Garrison 02:01, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 00:50, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As there are only two subcategories in it, I will support a merge, but to Category:Slave trade. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]