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/2025_April_28

April 28

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:TBD (TV network) affiliates

Propose renaming Category:TBD (TV network) affiliates to Category:Roar (TV network) affiliates

Nominator's rationale: Name change 4/28/2025 Mvcg66b3r (talk) 12:43, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People associated with events

Propose renaming Category:People associated with events to Category:People by historical event

Nominator's rationale: rename and purge, the category currently mixes up people associated with things happened in the past, and people associated with organized events. It is basically an example of WP:SHAREDNAME. Purge Category:Event participants and Category:Event planners (that belong to organized events) and keep the remainder e.g. as "historical events". We can then also put it as a subcategory under Category:History. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:04, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Volleyball players from Nagoya

Propose merging Category:Volleyball players from Nagoya to Category:Sportspeople from Nagoya

Nominator's rationale: Category with just one entry. Also merge to Category:Volleyball players from Aichi Prefecture. Also nominating for merging-

All categories with 3 or less entries. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:22, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Guerilla artists

Propose renaming Category:Guerilla artists to Category:Guerrilla artists
Propose renaming Category:Guerilla art and hacking art to Category:Guerrilla art and hacking art

Nominator's rationale: Spelling guerrilla with one r is now "obsolete" and "a misspelling" according to wikt:guerilla. The article for Guerrilla art already has the correct spelling, and is a member of Category:Guerilla artists, so there's an inconsistency here. Other non-warfare articles using the term (such as Guerrilla marketing) also have the correct spelling, so there's no real precedent for keeping these two category titles as they are. Pineapple Storage (talk) 08:36, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:LGBTQ themes in Greek mythology

Propose purging Category:LGBTQ themes in Greek mythology (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: purge biographies and biographical subcategories, LGBTQ theme is not a defining characteristic of them. There is already a list of homosexual lovers in Greek mythology. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Locations in Indo-European mythology

Propose merging Category:Locations in Indo-European mythology to Category:Places in mythology

Nominator's rationale: merge, these are relatively unrelated bodies of mythology. We do not have a Category:Indo-European mythology either. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:07, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Candidates in Ontario provincial election categories

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary duplication of the word Ontario. It is already obvious that Ontario-specific parties would be the ones contesting Ontario provincial elections. RedBlueGreen93 03:02, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose (of kept, in view of Marcocapelle's comment below). We have the name of the party and the name of an event. And not at all obvious. The change may inadvertently suggest to look up whether Green Party (Austria) took part in these elections (an absurd example, of course, to make a point). --Altenmann >talk 04:36, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought we did not categorize candidates as such? Marcocapelle (talk) 05:36, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

People don't get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates per se, but if a person who has been a non-winning election candidate (and thus can't be categorized as a member of the legislature) does have preexisting notability for other reasons in order to actually get an article on those other grounds, then we do categorize them as candidates — mainly because if we don't, then they tend to get added to (and thereby clutter up and overpopulate) the general "[Party] politicians" parent categories, so we do need them to be grouped separately from the parent category. Bearcat (talk) 14:15, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: None of the categories were tagged; I will do so. Discussion on Altenmann's and Marcocapelle's points would be appreciated :)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:34, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:22, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose (if kept), I agree with Altenmann. It makes no sense to shorten the actual/official party names (afaics, with the exception of the Communist Party of Canada (Ontario) and Ontario New Democratic Party, they are all individual/separate parties and not just chapters/wings of national/federal parties as the proposed names would imply). The proposed names would also be inconsistent with corresponding articles, both w.r.t. the parties' main articles (obv) and w.r.t. all the "... candidates in the YYYY Ontario provincial election" articles that are in the nominated categories (e.g., Ontario Liberal Party candidates in the 1977 Ontario provincial election, etc.). Regarding Marcocapelle's point: I'm not sure what I lean towards in this matter, but Bearcat's explanation sounds reasonable. As there are a lot of other "candidates" categories (see Category:Political candidates by nationality), this should probably be a separate discussion. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 03:26, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Medieval scripts

Propose merging Category:Medieval scripts to Category:Handwriting script

Nominator's rationale: WP:DUPCAT. This is an unnecessarily nested category - I noticed it when someone moved a page on my watchlist from this one to the merge target I've proposed. There isn't an extremely clear line between what makes a script "medieval" and what makes it pre- or post-medieval, and palaeographers don't tend to talk in those terms about them either. If this category is kept, it should be clearly categorized as a non-diffusing subcat, so that items aren't removed from one category when placed in the other.

tl;dr everything in Cat A is part of Cat B by definition; however, being in Cat A does not preclude being in some other subcat of Cat B as well. asilvering (talk) 17:29, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please ping on reply if necessary, I'm not watching this page. -- asilvering (talk) 17:33, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RanDom 404 (talk) 21:29, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, medieval script is a proper subcategory of handwriting script, but there are more than enough articles about modern handwriting to be kept apart. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:39, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is the first "real" relist; the previous one occurred literally the day it was filed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 02:21, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mass murder in the Gaza Strip

Propose deleting Category:Mass murder in the Gaza Strip (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category seems to exist primarily if not entirely for POV pushing with attacks being labeled as 'mass murder' irrespective of what sources say. I don't know if a single article within it meets the standards for Verifiable, Neutral, and Defining. As an alternative maybe merge with "Massacres in the Gaza Strip". Bob drobbs (talk) 18:50, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What about Category:Mass murder in Palestine? AHI-3000 (talk) 19:00, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through examples, it looks like that broader category should probably be deleted too, and that the POV pushing is happening on both sides. Look here Ramat Eshkol bus bombing. 5 people were killed in a terrorist attack. No mention anywhere of "mass murder" in the article but it's in the category. Bob drobbs (talk) 19:08, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually.... should I just withdraw this request and re-submit it as a collection of related "mass murder" categories? Bob drobbs (talk) 19:53, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That makes more sense than just singling out one category. AHI-3000 (talk) 00:34, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bob drobbs I would strongly oppose that - mass murder has a specific definition. If the entries in the category don't fit it then remove. Better than "massacre" which is inherently a POV term. PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:02, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merging to "Massacres in the Gaza Strip" seems the best solution. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:23, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is massacre not the far more POV term? The massacre categories should be deleted as well. PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:01, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The article Massacre starts by saying: "A massacre is an event of killing people who are not engaged in hostilities or are defenseless. It is generally used to describe a targeted killing of civilians en masse by an armed group or person." That seems a reasonable description to me and I can't see what is POV about it. The only question it leaves unanswered is about the minimum number of mortal victims before we call it a massacre. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:24, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion of this or any of the other mass murder categories (Though upmerging to the Palestine category makes sense, idk why we would do it like this). If it's not described as such in the page then remove it, but mass murder is a thing. The massacre categories are a worse named subcategory of the mass murder ones. There is the distinction that all the mass murder categories are typically used for individual lone actor crimes, while many of the entries we call massacres are state actiosn that don't fit there ... but just as often not. In any case this category system should not be disrupted because people in this topic area have POV problems - most of the problematic articles shouldn't even exist PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:07, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with all these categories is one I have never been able to think up a way to resolve: there are two encyclopedic, defining topics here, covered by both "mass murder" and "massacre" categories:
- "mass killings", committed by the state or military or by ethnic/political lines without individual basis, also called massacres, e.g. My Lai massacre
- "mass murders" committed by an individual or small group of people without state backing, also called massacres, e.g. École Polytechnique massacre
In sourcing that I have read, "mass killings" and "mass murder" (regardless of whether a murder conviction was sustained or the perpetrator died before trial, "mass murder" is the WP:COMMONNAME of the non-state type - however very rarely they are also called mass killings) are almost never discussed in the same breath, but frustratingly the terminology used heavily overlaps, and as a result so does our categories, so we have two slightly overlapping ones but some of the second group is sorted with the first group because people like the word "massacre". I don't know how to fix this, but I don't think deleting all of them will help. It will probably make it worse, because we will have collapsed the minor distinction we have, and even worse, in the wrong direction. The massacre categories are decidely more problematic. PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:15, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here's where I disagree with you. There are plenty of things which we describe as "massacre" in wikivoice. There should be no issue dropping the "My Lai massacre" into a massacre category. The same with the Flour massacre. If editors can argue that it should be called massacre in wikivoice it belongs in the category.

But at least within the I/P space, I'm not sure there is a single event which is described in wikivoice as "mass murder". It seems like it's solely being used for POV pushing.

I checked the mass murder page for guidance on possibly finding a definition. The page seems pretty problematic. First highlighting examples of terrorism as mass murder without seemingly sources calling them "mass murder". Then an entire section on "Criticism as an analytical category"

I'm still leaning pretty strongly that at least in the I/P space the "mass murder" categories don't add any value, and just make a POV mess of things. Bob drobbs (talk) 14:02, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you that in the I/P area at least it's a mess but the massacre category should also go then, no? Is that not *more* POV pushing, since it basically means "bad killing" as opposed to lawful killing? If we are going purely by things that are called that by some people for a POV term with no cohesive definition we should not have the category at all. Do we get to have a category called "bad events" if most sources view an event as morally abhorrent? No, obviously. Are we going to put the Saturday Night massacre into a massacre category? It has it in the title.

Yes, the mass murder Wikipedia page is deeply unfortunate and has been for a long time so I agree that I would not look at it for guidance on what constitutes that (I really need to get around to fixing that article), but the word does have a generally agreed upon definition - however, it is generally not applicable to state actions as agreed upon in those definitions, so there is widespread miscategorization going on here and probably none of the entries in this category would count.

The massacre subcategory is also problematic because most of the articles aren't titled with it in there, and if it is included it's uncited in the infobox or just "people called it this" which is not defining and disputed. The massacre page is meanwhile almost entirely an etymology of the word with just as many definitional problems as the mass murder one. I think something needs to change but both of these categories have problems in a way that needs to be sorted out beyond just deleting one of them entirely and collapsing the distinction.

Since nothing in this category is applicable to the non-state mass murder definition, this one can probably be deleted. There are a few in the other Palestine categories that do though. So delete this one and I would be open to deleting some of the other I/P ones but please do not do some general mass murder CfD. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:16, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose plain deletion, while one may argue about the category name (personally I think massacres fits better than mass murder) the articles clearly belong together as a group. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:47, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion for same reasons given above by others. AHI-3000 (talk) 04:14, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus is against deletion. I am cautiously relisting this discussion; a reminder that the extended-confirmed restriction applies to this discussion. Should the category be renamed?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:21, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:18th-century Irish monarchs

Propose deleting Category:18th-century Irish monarchs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, these weren't Irish people. Supposedly the category tree has deliberately been named Irish monarchs instead of monarchs of Ireland. If this goes ahead the 17th and 16th century categories should be purged, as well as the Irish queens regnant category. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:14, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose May I remind you that none of the monarchs or politicians categories cover ethnicity? They all cover nationality, and the country in question was the Kingdom of Ireland. Dimadick (talk) 08:41, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The tree of Category:Irish monarchs starts more than a millennium earlier than the Kingdom of Ireland. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:14, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Dimadick's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:21, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:04, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English pretenders to the French throne

Propose deleting Category:English pretenders to the French throne (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, too much overlap with Category:14th-century English monarchs to Category:17th-century English monarchs and not a defining characteristic for monarchs after Henry VI of England. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:56, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Subjective description of a hereditary claim that lasted all the way to the French Revolutionary Wars.Dimadick (talk) 08:42, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Dimadick's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:21, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The Oh Hellos songs

Propose deleting Category:The Oh Hellos songs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: All redirects to the band's three albums. Unhelpful for readers to just keep going back to the same articles where the most info about the songs comes from being included in the track listings. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:53, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

here from talk page notification ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ i thought it might be useful for aggregate data collection, but no strong opinions either way :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 01:23, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Saint Kitts and Nevis geography stubs

Propose merging Category:Saint Kitts and Nevis geography stubs to Category:Caribbean geography stubs

Nominator's rationale: There are only 46 mainspace articles in the category, when stub categories should have at least 60 - OpalYosutebito 『talk』『articles I want to eat』 19:42, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - the number of stubs fluctuates rapidly. This had 60 when created and is likely to have 60 again soon. If decision is to merge, it should be doubly merged to Category:Caribbean geography stubs and Category:Saint Kitts and Nevis stubs. 50 articles is usually enough for a stub category, and it currently has 50. Grutness...wha? 03:35, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- BTW - "should have at least 60" is for the creation of a stub category. It's generally understood that a stub category will often go below that level. Grutness...wha? 01:42, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Grutness's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:38, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The Office (American TV series) episode images

Propose merging Category:The Office (American TV series) episode images to Category:The Office (American TV series)

Nominator's rationale: Single file category. Other files are included in upper category. RanDom 404 (talk) 21:42, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why should we not move the other files to this category? Marcocapelle (talk) 07:23, 21 April 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, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 00:35, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]