Category talk:21st-century regents
Latest comment: 10 months ago by Nederlandse Leeuw in topic Naming
 | This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This category was nominated for renaming on 18 June 2023. The result of the discussion was rename to "viceroys". |
Naming edit
This category was nominated on 24 May for renaming from viceregal rulers to "viceroys". That was relisted and approved at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_June_18#Category:21st-century_viceregal_rulers.
Preceding centuries were then renamed to "regents" at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_June_11#Viceregal_rulers.
@Nederlandse Leeuw and Marcocapelle: I have added links between them, but would it be better for this to use "regents" like the others? – Fayenatic London 11:21, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Fayenatic london: yes I suspect that the content of the 21st-century category is meanwhile quite different from when it was originally nominated. It only contains a regent now. I also wonder if the article shouldn't be purged, having been a regent for a few days is not particularly defining. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:01, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Heh, well, that was a pretty pointless renaming then. I think it's best to just merge this to Category:Regents (as we are in the process of upmerging all 21st-century "rulers"). I'm not convinced by Marco that being a regent for a few days is nondefining; after all, we've got Umberto II of Italy ("reigned" for 34 days), Dipendra of Nepal ("reigned" for 4 days while in a coma after shooting himself in the head) and of course Khalid bin Barghash of Zanzibar, who was factually "reigning" as a sultan for just 38/45 minutes, but we do categorise even him as a sultan and a monarch. Even so, this may still be deleted/merged as a smallcat. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:47, 10 July 2023 (UTC)