Are these really appropriate categories?Edit

I saw Category:Massacres perpetrated by Jews and Category:Massacres perpetrated by Muslims, one of which was created by you and the other by عماد الدين المقدسي. I think these should be deleted. VR talk 01:00, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Massacres perpetrated by Muslims has been nominated for deletionEdit

 

Category:Massacres perpetrated by Muslims has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. VR talk 16:46, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy Christmas!Edit

Category:Local government in Anderson County, South CarolinaEdit

Hello, Marcocapelle,

You are usually flawless in your CFD closures but I believe you forgot to tag this category for deletion. Any way, I saw it when it showed up tonight on Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories.

I hope you are having a pleasant holiday. Happy New Year to you! Liz Read! Talk! 01:42, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Indian restaurants outside India has been nominated for deletionEdit

 

Category:Indian restaurants outside India has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:14, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

RedundanrEdit

Don't you think that Category:Wikipedia categories named after Hebrew Bible people Category:Wikipedia categories named after royalty (along with most/all of the categories Wikipedia categories xxxx) are redundant? Editor2020 (talk) 01:32, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

  • @Editor2020: I read somewhere that the original idea was that categories named after a person would only be a subcategory of Wikipedia categories named after x because normal biographical categories should contain the article about the person instead of the category. Admittedly, meanwhile the latter happens a lot as well. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:02, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
It is probably a good idea to post the question with my answer at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories as well, to see if other editors have thoughts about it. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:07, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Russia and foreign agentsEdit

Hi! Please take a look at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_January_3#Category:Unregistered_public_associations_listed_as_a_Russian_foreign_agent. I explained that non-profit here is not an American category, but a part of a category from Russian law. Maybe you would like to change a vote? By the way, is it a vote or a discussion, how does it function in enwiki? Wikisaurus (talk) 12:22, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Category:The Downlink membersEdit

Hello, Marcocapelle,

You tagged this category for speedy deletion but it hasn't been emptied. Could you get the bot to do this? Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 06:52, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

  • @Liz: there was just a little bit of delay before the removal of the category from the template script affected the category content, or put it differently you happened to be busy with deleting too quickly after I G6-tagged the category page. (I would rather not postpone tagging, because then there would be a small risk that I entirely forget about it.) Marcocapelle (talk) 12:09, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Template:GeorgiaUS-legislative-committee-stubEdit

Hello, Marcocapelle,

This template didn't link to a deletion discussion. Maybe the tag is different on a template page than a category page. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 06:58, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

  • @Liz: the link does not work because these templates are discussed on a technically "wrong" platform (while content wise it is the right platform). I do not think there is a solution for it except leaving a comment in the edit summary. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:18, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Alternatively, could you perhaps close the stub discussions directly? It is just a lot on the January 2 page, otherwise there are hardly ever discussions about stubs. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:22, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
I don't close a lot of deletion discussions some I'm not familiar with CFD closures but I'll if there is anything I can do. I need to pick up some different admin responsibilities so maybe I'll try to move into this area later on in 2022. Liz Read! Talk! 20:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Marcocapelle,
You, or whoever closes the discussion, have to find a way to change these CSD tags for templates. They attempt to link to a TFD discussion but there is not one to link to. Can you adapt the deletion tag to point to a CFD discussion where the decision was made to delete them? It's important that this information is included in a deletion summary on the page. Thanks for looking into this. Liz Read! Talk! 07:53, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1st-century BC Indian philosophersEdit

 

A tag has been placed on Category:1st-century BC Indian philosophers indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkltalk 16:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Category:Bolivian television hostsEdit

Hello, Marcocapelle,

What do you want to do with this category? It was unclear from the CFD decision and it showed up on the Empty Category list tonight. Thank you! Liz Read! Talk! 01:05, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Recent spreeEdit

Hi Marco. Thought you might be interested. I noticed a relatively new user is keen on creating such categories.[1]-[2]-[3]-[4]-[5] As Azerbaijanis only became an ethnic group in the 19th/20th centuries, and English-language sources make no mention (or barely ever) of individual Azerbaijanis predating this time period, these categories will never be populated. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:08, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Update: I just noticed that this IP[6] is mimicking said users ("Multituberculata") edits in relation to these categories throughout several other Wikipedia languages. Probably to create more audience/i.e. room in order to press such categories as "legitimate". @Armatura: @ZaniGiovanni: @HistoryofIran:. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:15, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
That IP is very concerning, and the categories created by Multituberculata are historically incorrect. No such designation at the time. Seems to be just a POV pusher. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 16:55, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
Yeah I agree, its not vandalism. As for the CfD nomination, here it is.[7] - LouisAragon (talk) 00:29, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Rename categoriesEdit

Please see my proposal to speedily rename subcategories of Category:Enforced disappearances by country e.g. Category:Forced disappearances in Argentina to Category:Enforced disappearances in Argentina to align with the parent category per C2C. Hugo999 (talk) 04:24, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Category:3rd millennium in Bagmati ProvinceEdit

Hello, Marcocapelle,

I have temporarily de-tagged this category page because your CFD closure doesn't state what the decision was so it's not clear to me that the category should be deleted. Could you revisit your closure and state what the result is? Many thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 04:13, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

I'll happily revert all of my category edits once I see your final CFD closure decision. Liz Read! Talk! 04:17, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
  Done Thank you! Liz Read! Talk! 04:20, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

CfD closuresEdit

I saw your request at WP:CR for help with the CfD backlog and figured I'd give it a try. I've tried to do a handful of merges, renames, and relists; they should be listed here. I'd appreciate it if you'd check my work: did I do everything more-or-less correctly? Thanks for all you do at CfD: doing some of these closes myself has certainly helped me to appreciate how much work goes into them! Best regards, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:54, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

  • @Extraordinary Writ: thank you very much and you did a good job! The only additional advice I can give you right now is to add an Old CfD notification on the talk page of a category when it is not deleted (e.g. when renamed). This is mentioned under Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Administrator_instructions#Process and while the explanation of the Old CfD notification is in the "Keep" section, from the examples it becomes clear that it may also apply to "Rename". Marcocapelle (talk) 08:57, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
    • Many thanks. I went back and added all of the Old CfD templates, and I've closed/relisted several more discussions today. Thanks again for your help, and do let me know if there's anything else that I might not be aware of. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:47, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Yale University CategorizationEdit

Hello, Marcocapelle. I noticed that you gave the Yale Universities Alumni decade categories for merging.(For reference, I have been sorting all alumni into these categories) What do you intend to do with these categories, as none of these were discussed in any of these talk pages. Thanks, MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 15:36, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

  • @MrMeAndMrMe: not sure what you mean. The intention is to merge, but you had already figured that out. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:17, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

LandscapeEdit

No, this is much less specific, and much less helpful! What are you trying to do here? Johnbod (talk) 15:29, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

  • @Johnbod: I tried to move him from a history category and a gardens category to a biographies category. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:37, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
But as a very major figure in the style he clearly NEEDS to be in the "history" category, rather than (as well as) a ragbag assortment of shopping centre & airport designers. How does this help the reader? You didn't do the same to Capability Brown, nor should you. Johnbod (talk) 15:42, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
  • @Johnbod: I do not understand. Shopping centre and airport designers are not landscape and garden designers, are they? How would they get mixed up? Marcocapelle (talk) 15:50, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
I think you will find they are, or some of them! You say you tried to move him from a "history" category, but there simply are no "garden history" categories that I can see (anywhere). The gardening categories arte a huge mess, but a deal of thought is needed before attempting to rearrange them. Johnbod (talk) 15:56, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Well until I did it today, that was not linked to Category:Gardening in England, which is typical of the craziness of these categories. Johnbod (talk) 03:36, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Category:Historiography of LGBT in New York CityEdit

[8] This doesn't appear to be the proper use of such a category. Historiography is the study of how history is written, so if this category collected works about how NYC LGBT history was written, would make sense, but simply collecting history books about LGBT in NYC fit within the prior category, Category:History of New York City. Alternatively could rename the one in question as Category:LGBT history in New York City, but in either case it's a triple intersection, which we usually avoid. czar 02:54, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

  • @Czar: I do not quite see the problem. History books are subject of historiography just like military battles are subject of history and barium is subject of chemistry. We include subjects of studies in their respective category trees. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:52, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
    • The Historiography category contains items that should be classified as History, not Historiography. Gay New York and Let the Record Show are both works of LGBT history. For "historiography" to be a defining trait of these works, the work would have to analyze how LGBT history is written as a major component of the work. I believe these category creations should be undone. czar 14:08, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Ruling families of HREEdit

Hi, I closed Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Ruling families of counties and duchies using "Ruling families" for all. Let me know if you think I was misguided on the Saxony category or any other details. – Fayenatic London 11:59, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Cisleithania again.Edit

I've nominated a few articles for renaming. See Talk:1900–1901 Cisleithanian legislative election. I thought that it was a natural follow-up to the CFD decision. But it's being opposed. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

CFDEdit

Regarding this - it doesn't actually appear to have been re-listed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 February 28? GiantSnowman`

  • @GiantSnowman: thanks for notifying. The discussion had been removed by Anomiebot. I have restored it now. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:37, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
Bloody bots! Thanks. GiantSnowman 19:38, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Cfd/speedy notificationEdit

Hello. I'm still rather clumsy at times when initiating CFDs. I started one earlier on a category you created. Soon after I realized I intended to do a speedy instead and reverted myself. When I redid it as a speedy, I would have ticked 'notify page creator if possible' if I had noticed Twinkle defaulted that to off for a speedy, so I'm therefore notifying you now. The page is Category:Swedish history-related lists and the cfd/s is here. Cheers!:) --DB1729 (talk) 23:23, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Disestablishments in the Kazakh Soviet Socialist RepublicEdit

 

A tag has been placed on Category:Disestablishments in the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 20:37, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Problem with some boat types and categoriesEdit

There are a number of names of boats that apply to different and somewhat unrelated types. Therefore when you have removed what you presumably think is a parent category of a type of boat (e.g. [9]) you are ignoring the problem that not all boats in the article are in the sub-category. I would hope that the articles concerned are clearly written enough for this to be obvious. I just thought I should flag this up in case there is some overwhelming reason for your edits. I have reverted those that I have spotted. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 21:27, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

A solution in (I guess) most cases is to add some extra categories if you really want to get rid of the category "boat types" - as in [10]. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 21:39, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Category:People from the Republic of Geneva (1541–1815) has been nominated for renamingEdit

 

Category:People from the Republic of Geneva (1541–1815) has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 19:35, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Batch CfD with AWBEdit

  1. Open AWB (I presume you have AWB permissions).
  2. Fill out the page list with the pages to be tagged (I typically run some regex on the list)
  3. Under the More... tab, tick "Enabled", and select "Prepend", and paste the CfD template into the box below
  4. Under the Start tab, add a summary, click "Start", and then click "Save" for each edit
 
The Make list section
 
The More... tab
 
The Start tab

 ― Qwerfjkltalk 07:34, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

To expand on Step 2, here's how I do the regex bit:
I typically use Notepad++ for things like this, but there are plenty of tools out there. Your goal is to get just a list of page names, one per line.
The list starts off as something like this, copying from the CfD page:
Replace the starting :* [[: on each line with nothing to get rid of it. Then, replace the regular expression ]].+ with nothing. (This regex represents the ]] text followed by everything else after it on that line.

Once the regex stuff is done, save the file and upload it to AWB to add all the pages at once. (See the screenshot below and to the left.) Bsoyka (talk) 14:41, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
I just get the list as plaintext (as you described above), the copy & paste it directly. Qwerfjkltalk 15:05, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
@Qwerfjkl and Bsoyka:   Done!! Thank you so much for your help!! Marcocapelle (talk) 18:23, 16 April 2022 (UTC)


Tagging categories for deletionEdit

Hello, Marcocapelle,

For some reason, you are not using links to the pertinent CFD discussion when you are tagging categories for deletion after you close CFD discussions. For example, the most recent example linked to the CFD discussion for today, April 21st, instead of the correct date. Also, we can't delete categories that are not empty, that leaves red linked categories on pages which are to be avoided per WP:REDNO. I assume emptying categories is part of closing a CFD discussion, whether or not you are an admin. Your tagging is usually flawless so I assume this is temporary glitch with these language categories. Thank you for all of your consistently good work. Liz Read! Talk! 05:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

  • @Liz: the date was a mistake indeed, apologies for that. I realize that non-empty categories cannot be deleted, so I left them to be checked by User:Pppery as recommended in one of these discussions. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:43, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Closing "delete" CFDs as a non-adminEdit

Hi Marcocappelle. I've been trying to understand how to help out with the backlog at CFD as a non-admin -- which has been comparable to navigating the maze in The Shining. I've seen that you have closed CFDs as "delete" and I'm trying to understand what are the steps involved. I assume that you manually empty each category before tagging them for a G6 speedy deletion? (For reference, I'm aware of WP:CFDAI, WP:CFDW and WT:CFDW.) JBchrch talk 21:24, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

  • That is exactly correct. I am manually emptying with a link to the discussion in the edit summary. After I tag the page as G6 an administrator will delete the category, sometimes within a few minutes, sometimes after a few hours. Feel free to ask more about it when you need, because I have meanwhile been doing this for quite a few years. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:02, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
    Thank you very much! JBchrch talk 14:14, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Maha bint Mishari Al Saud and othersEdit

You have deleted a cat from these articles, but you also added a wl just above the defaultsort, these are reverted. --Egeymi (talk) 09:04, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 28Edit

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

Sara bint Mashour Al Saud
added a link pointing to Sara
Sara bint Talal Al Saud
added a link pointing to Sara
Sora bint Saud Al Saud
added a link pointing to Sora

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:People using unaccredited degrees has been nominated for deletionEdit

 

Category:People using unaccredited degrees has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --Animalparty! (talk) 07:09, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Category:Languages of Palestine has been nominated for merging to Category:Languages of the State of PalestineEdit

 

Category:Languages of Palestine has been nominated for merging to Category:Languages of the State of Palestine. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 19:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Tagging categoriesEdit

Hi, Marcocapelle.

I want to nominate and tag Category:Counter-terrorism and many subcategories for speedy renaming per C2D because the main article was renamed to Counterterrorism (without a hyphen). Is there a quick way to tag categories en masse? 1857a (talk) 22:22, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Germany categoriesEdit

Hey, regarding your nomination of Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_April_11, I noticed there were many leftovers not included in that CfD such as Category:1st-century BC establishments in Germany, Category:9th-century establishments in Germany‎ and many establishments categories such as Category:1490s establishments in Germany. What should be done with these? Gonnym (talk) 12:05, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

  • @Gonnym: establishments are a problem that will probably never be solved because many establishments (places, buildings etc.) still exist today. Editors will argue (and have argued) that establishments in Germany categories should be kept because today they are in Germany. The best solution I can think of so far is entirely abandoning the establishments by country scheme but that would be quite radical. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:50, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I was coming to ask about the same thing, there are still quite a few Germany categories in Category:Establishments in the Holy Roman Empire by year, especially for the early modern period (1600s-1800s). There is a lesser number in Category:Disestablishments in the Holy Roman Empire by year. I was wondering if you were going to nominate them as well. Liz Read! Talk! 20:13, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

CfD adviceEdit

Hi, what would you say should be done to nominations with no participation, even after the first relisting? Would it be a soft outcome, a no consensus, another relist, or something else? As a specific example, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 25#Category:User kik .― Qwerfjkltalk 14:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

  • @Qwerfjkl: as far as I know there are no very clear rules laid down for this particular situation. Below is what I found best practice for myself. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
  1. I start checking whether there is consensus about a broader principle, e.g. as specified in WP:OCAT. If that is the case then I will happily close as soft merge/soft delete.
  2. If not, I check whether I can participate in the discussion instead of closing it. Especially when I have any doubt, I will share my doubt with the nominator, if only in the form of a question.
  3. If there is no consensus about a broader principle and I also do not see any reason for doubt myself, a soft closure is preferable over a no consensus closure for sure.
  4. At the same time, leaving a discussion open for another month (while not relisting) is also a good option, or maybe the best option. Some admins (or other editors) check whether they can close long overdue discussions and they might join the discussion instead, thus contributing to a clearer outcome. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
  • As a long-time CFD Admin volunteer, I think the above is superb advice. The only thing I'd add is to notify relevant WikiProjects. Check whether the category talk pages have relevant WikiProject banners, and if not, add them – this should result in the CFD being notified to projects via the Alerts system. Occasionally, I manually post a link to the discussion on WikiProject talk pages too, or on the talk page of the main article, or in similar current CFDs. – Fayenatic London 05:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Germany categoriesEdit

Hello, Marcocapelle,

I'm writing to you because you proposed Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 11#Germany 1000-1803. I ended up handling the deletion of many of these categories once they were emptied but there are some of these Germany categories that fell through the cracks that still need to be dealt with and I was hoping you could put together a proposal, Part 2.

You can find some of them in Category:Establishments in the Holy Roman Empire by decade, Category:Establishments in the Holy Roman Empire by century (which has the same ones as in Category:2nd-millennium establishments in the Holy Roman Empire) and Category:18th-century disestablishments in Germany. I also wasn't sure whether some of the categories in Category:Establishments in the Holy Roman Empire by state should be merged as well. And there are things like separate child disestablishment categories for Austria, Austrian Netherlands and Old Swiss Confederacy, should these be merged like the German categories were? I wish I had taken classes in European history when I was back in college and I'd know more about why Germany is considered a separate country prior to the 10th century and after the 19th century but not the intervening centuries. Thanks for any insight and help on this you can offer on this subject! Liz Read! Talk! 21:26, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

I also wanted to mention that Gonnym really helped out clearing and recategorizing some of the lingering Germany categories that were still in Category:Establishments in the Holy Roman Empire by year so that parent category is completely cleaned up now. Liz Read! Talk! 21:28, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Oh, my, I just looked at the rest of your user talk page and see that I've already had this discussion with you and Gonnym earlier in May! I must review an editor's talk page before posting a new message. Well, I'll leave this all here for you any way, in case you had any new insight into some of the other categories that I mention here that weren't mentioned in our discussion (above) in May. My apologies for repeating myself! Liz Read! Talk! 21:32, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Cfd nominationEdit

I saw you did a cfd nomination for Category:1966 establishments in Bangladesh because there was no Bangladesh before 1971. That's why I proposed to renamed them to East Pakistan in the discussion page. I also know that there is no branch category for East Pakistan. Should I create the branch category or wait for the end of discussion? Mehedi Abedin 14:38, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Category:Morning AgainEdit

Hey, Marcocapelle,

Did you mean to tag this for speedy deletion? Liz Read! Talk! 06:25, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Also, please nominate categories like Category:Fictional characters with body dysmorphic disorder for deletion at WP:CFD. I see a lot of times you emptying categories instead and, as you know, this is actively discouraged. In fact, it is stated that edits that empty categories "out of process" should be reverted but I won't here. But please go through proper channels in the future. You know the system better than I do so none of this information should be news to you! I know that CFD works more slowly but I've seen this happen before with other empty categories and I would rather not start reverting your edits that effectively empty a category. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 18:00, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you involved Category:People from Baryshivka Raion and Category:People from Manhush Raion in a CFD discussion when they were already tagged for speedy deletion CSD C1 the day before. It would have been deleted today but now they are part of a CFD discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 22:28, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
  • @Liz: the category might have been repopulated before deletion and then forgotten at CfD. Inclusion in the CfD nomination is just less risky. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:35, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Category:Roman Catholic prince-bishops in the Holy Roman Empire has been nominated for mergingEdit

 

Category:Roman Catholic prince-bishops in the Holy Roman Empire has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:21, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Songs based on real peopleEdit

Hi, the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_May_29#Category:Songs_in_memory_of_deceased_persons is going in a different direction since you last commented there. You might want to start Category:Songs based on real people (or Category:Songs about real people?) anyway, as not everything in the nominated category would belong there. – Fayenatic London 08:45, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Category:Bishops of Verden has been nominated for deletionEdit

 

Category:Bishops of Verden has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:06, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Supercategories of Category:KnowledgeEdit

I was about to make some categorization changes to Category:Knowledge, when I noticed that they would effectively revert two of your edits, one of them fairly recent.

The edits: 12 August 2016 and 2 April 2021

I thought it was worth discussing, since these broad categories can get kind of contentious, and I would prefer not to engage in a slow edit war.

I would argue that the topic of 'knowledge' is generally classified as a component of epistemology, rather than the specific category Category:Mental content; note that mental content is currently a redirect to a small section in mind. Knowledge is certainly related to the philosophy of mind, but I don't think it's a subcategory relationship. Also relevant: the guideline WP:CAT § Eponymous categories allows an article to share categories with its eponymous category, an exception to the general guidelines around categories. Retro (talk | contribs) 14:15, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

  • @Retro: thanks for checking. Here is how I look at it. (Almost) all articles in the tree of knowledge naturally belong to mental content as well, but not vice versa, so knowlegde is a proper subcategory of mental content. Likewise (almost) all articles in the tree of epistemology naturally belong to knowledge as well, but not vice versa. Not every article about knowledge is about the philosophy of knowledge. In other words, epistemology should be a subcategory of knowledge rather than a parent category. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:09, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
I find your point about epistemology compelling, since the term 'knowledge' and topic of knowledge is used more broadly than merely the philosophical study of knowledge. Epistemology could be thought of as one lens for looking at the topic of knowledge. The general approach of analyzing article scope in relation to the subset included in the category tree going upwards also seems very useful.
Mental content still does not seem like a proper parent category of Knowledge; I don't think knowledge is restricted to the internal contents of a mind, and I suspect reliable sources would agree. I think it sort of imposes philosophical idealism on the category tree to sort it this way, which doesn't seem like an entirely neutral categorization scheme.
For present subcategories of knowledge that aren't really about mental contents, I would give Category:Access to Knowledge movement, Category:Bodies of knowledge, Category:Knowledge deities‎, Category:Knowledge economy‎, Category:Knowledge engineering‎, Category:Knowledge management, Category:Knowledge sharing, Category:Sociology of knowledge, Category:Sources of knowledge, among others. Granted, perhaps some of those categories shouldn't exist or be direct children of Knowledge, but that is still 9 out of 26 direct subcategories, hardly insignificant. Also, many of the other categories I didn't mention seem improperly scoped as direct children of Knowledge (for instance, Category:Inductive reasoning is currently a direct child, but it's also a deeper descendant via Category:Reasoning in Category:Sources of knowledge).
(Importantly, I did not modify the category tree before analyzing it to hopefully reduce personal bias). Retro (talk | contribs) 20:55, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I really didn't intend to write a wall of text, so I'm sorry if that was annoying. I've been thinking about it for a few days, and my current conclusions are that broad categories shouldn't have parent categories unless they're a strict superset. An example I would give is Category:Computing being a subcategory of Category:Technology.

As for how this applies to the Knowledge and the Mental Content categories: I agree that 'knowledge' is strongly related to minds (arguably, minds causes knowledge, or are required to organize it). But it seems to me there can be articles about knowledge that aren't about the mind (by contrast, all articles about computing are articles about technology). I don't really feel like making this change right now without consensus beyond myself. I'll probably think about it some more and try to understand the rest of the category tree better over the next few years. Retro (talk | contribs) 22:17, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

  • @Retro: if you are willing to take a few years for it then you certainly have patience 😀. To me knowledge seems as much part of the mind as computing is part of technology. Maybe not every article about knowledge is more broadly also about the mind, but in most instances that will be the case though. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:51, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Prince-bishoprics of LivoniaEdit

I can't make up my mind about this category. I don't think that "of Livonia" is tenable; they were not created by the Livonian state (the Livonian Confederation or Terra Mariana). So at best, they could be said to be "in the Livonian Confederation". As far as I can tell, the bishops were eventually created as Prince-Bishops by the Holy Roman Empire. So they are "of the HRE". But this didn't last very long. Any thoughts? Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:25, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

So what about a proposal to rename it to Category:Prince-bishoprics in Livonia or Category:Prince-bishoprics in the Livonian Confereration ? Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:36, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1758 establishments in ChinaEdit

 

A tag has been placed on Category:1758 establishments in China indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:03, 30 July 2022 (UTC)


Category-related Barnstars!Edit

Ok, so I think we'll all agree that there are a lot of contributors to cfd. But I see you two almost everywhere. Contributing to a vast number of discussions and closing ones you haven't.

It seems to me, at times, you're all that stands between keeping a discussion going in order to find consensus, and it turning into "no consensus".

So 2 things.

First:

  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For all the work you do in and around WP:CFD. - jc37 12:02, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

and:

Hiding created this a long time ago to give to me. I'm (hopefully) paying that sentiment forward:

  The Categorisation Barnstar
For all the hard work you do regarding categories. - jc37 12:02, 30 July 2022 (UTC)


You both well deserve them.

And finally, as noted, you've both clearly been very active around CfD. So I'll pass on some advice which had been suggested to me by others before me:

Look around at those you see positively and civilly contributing, who you might deem to have a clue(tm). And see if they might be interested in being nominated for adminship.

If it helps, this is my criteria: User:Jc37/RfA/Criteria. But honestly, you should follow your own instincts to what you feel is right.

I wish you both well : ) - jc37 12:02, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Category:GandhiansEdit

Hi Marcocapelle. You may have seen that Category:Gandhians, which you nominated at CfD and which was soft-deleted, has been recreated at my request. You're of course free to renominate it and seek consensus, though you might want to look at my comments at WP:REFUND, where I outlined my objections to your rationale. Those objections shouldn't, of course, be taken as an endorsement of the category's use in every current case – there are probably a lot of cases where it's misused or isn't supported by the article content. I plan to have a more substantial look through the articles in the category at some point, but that won't be for at least a few days. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 15:51, 6 August 2022 (UTC)