Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 July 8

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Rename Timrollpickering (talk) 19:07, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Dang district to Category:Dang district, India

Nominator's rationale: needs to be renamed (and its subcategories) to avoid confusion with Dang District, Nepal. PamD 23:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - To prevent ambiguity. Koridas 📣 00:07, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy per WP:C2D. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete Timrollpickering (talk) 19:08, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:History of pederasty (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Same as Haiduc other pro-pedophilia categories, the term "pederasty" refers to a concept which is by most non-Fringe sources described as a Greco-Roman "phenomenon". To try to apply this to other cultures in history is nothing but agenda pushing and original research. There is no "History of pederasty" article and i don't see why we would have a need for a category of it or why any of these pages would be defined by the concept. ★Trekker (talk) 23:02, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:49, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Haiduc was banned by ArbCom in 2010 for reasons that are obvious based on the ANI discussion about him. The content he wrote was dishonest propaganda exaggerating the prevalence and social standing of practices that in today's world non-WP:Fringe sources call child sexual abuse, as explained here. Part of this effort involved purposely conflating relationships between grown males that really are part of gay history together with abusive relationships between a grown man and a young boy, and calling it all "pederasty". This category is a legacy of that effort, and many of the articles in it do not even mention the term pederasty. There is no need for this category; the articles in it can be in more appropriate categories based on what is actually discussed in each one. Crossroads ^-talk- 03:56, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete Timrollpickering (talk) 19:08, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Victorian pederasty (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Same reason as the other pro-pedophilia Haiduc creations (see bellow). Its about time this stuff was cleaned up. ★Trekker (talk) 22:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Haiduc was banned by ArbCom in 2010 for reasons that are obvious based on the ANI discussion about him. The content he wrote was dishonest propaganda exaggerating the prevalence and social standing of practices that in today's world non-WP:Fringe sources call child sexual abuse, as explained here. Part of this effort involved purposely conflating relationships between grown males that really are part of gay history together with abusive relationships between a grown man and a young boy, and calling it all "pederasty". This category is a legacy of that effort, and many of the articles in it do not even mention the term pederasty. There is no need for this category; the articles in it can be in more appropriate categories based on what is actually discussed in each one. Crossroads ^-talk- 03:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge. bibliomaniac15 21:23, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Municipal regions in Sharjah (emirate) to Category:Central Region, Sharjah

Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary layer, not helpful to navigation. The articles for Al Madam and Dhaid describe them as towns, not "municipal regions". They fit within the sibling Category:Central Region, Sharjah.

If not deleted, the category should be renamed to Category:Municipal regions in the Emirate of Sharjah. – Fayenatic London 20:49, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Dual merge, also to Category:Populated places in the Emirate of Sharjah. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:55, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The articles on the towns are already within that category. The subcat Category:Al-Madam, Sharjah does not need to be in that target since it also includes landforms. – Fayenatic London 07:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok, sounds reasonable. I support merging anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:04, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: keep. bibliomaniac15 03:19, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Children of Noah (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:SMALLCAT, only three articles and zero chance of expansion. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:43, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep A functional small category as a subcategory of Category:Noah. Dimadick (talk) 08:09, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Three articles and three child-cats is decent in my mind.★Trekker (talk) 10:49, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete Timrollpickering (talk) 19:09, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Shudo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Another POV and agenda-pushing creation of Haiduc. He created it and promptly added his "History of pederasty" category to it. Despite "shudo" not being related to Greek pederasty in any way besides being about male same-sex relationships. I looked and most of the pages this category appears in and there was no mention of he term in most of them. He appears to have made it only to push the idea that sexual relationships with addolecent males and adult men have happened in grand civilizations and is therefore "normal". I see no reason to assume that most articles in this category are in any way defined by this term. (Also note that the term shudo doesn't even have its own article and that the article it redirects to states that so called shudo relationships did not always have to be between adolecent men and adult men, but could be between two adolencents, a higher class man and a lower class man and eventually even two men of the same class.) ★Trekker (talk) 20:37, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Haiduc was banned by ArbCom in 2010 for reasons that are obvious based on the ANI discussion about him. The content he wrote was dishonest propaganda exaggerating the prevalence and social standing of practices that in today's world non-WP:Fringe sources call child sexual abuse, as explained here. This category is a legacy of that and should be deleted. Crossroads ^-talk- 22:42, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:05, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete. bibliomaniac15 22:30, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Book of the Year Award recipients to Category:Iran's Book of the Year Awards recipients

Nominator's rationale: There are many "book of the year awards"; this category appears to contain only winners of Iran's Book of the Year Awards. BenKuykendall (talk) 20:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete appears to be WP:OCAWARD; despite the title, the winners are authors not books apparently. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:OCAWARD. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:07, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge/delete as nom. bibliomaniac15 22:30, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose merging Category:Hills of Sharjah to Category:Hills of the United Arab Emirates and Category:Geography of the Emirate of Sharjah
• Propose merging Category:Hills of the Emirate of Fujairah to Category:Hills of the United Arab Emirates and Category:Geography of the Emirate of Fujairah
• Propose deleting Category:Hills of the Emirate of Ras Al Khaimah

Nominator's rationale: Very small categories. The Ras Al Khaimah contains only a redirect which was categorised in the wrong emirate anyway, as the target is in the Sharjah category, see this edit by Alexandermcnabb. (However, see Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_July_7#Jabal_Ghumaylah for a redirect that might be restored.) – Fayenatic London 09:25, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge (and delete Ras Al Khaimah) per nomination. No need to keep subdividing into overly small categories. Softlavender (talk) 11:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:10, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge them. Leo1pard (talk) 06:27, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete Timrollpickering (talk) 19:09, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Modern pederasty (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: "Modern pederasty" is not really a thing in reliable, non-WP:Fringe sources. As the article Pederasty states, The term pederasty is primarily used to refer to historical practices of certain cultures, particularly ancient Greece and ancient Rome. Nowadays, an adult engaging in sexual activity with an underage child (adolescent or otherwise) is rightly considered child sexual abuse. Nearly all the articles in this category should instead be (and are) categorized in the subcategories of Category:Child sexual abuse or in Category:Pedophile activism. Using this label could unintentionally give legitimation to an unsavory POV; as Pederasty#Modern view notes, Modern sexual abusers who prefer boys...sometimes appeal to practices in Ancient Greece as a justification. Of interest may be the fact that the category's creator, Haiduc, was banned by ArbCom in 2010, for reasons that are obvious based on the ANI discussion about him. Haiduc also created most of the other pederasty related categories, so those may also be worthy of deletion, but for now I will start with the worst one. Crossroads ^-talk- 03:47, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete For all reasons given above.★Trekker (talk) 06:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Also delete all of the other pederasty related categories this user created. Its all agenda pushing trash.★Trekker (talk) 18:19, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Would the deletion create any orphan articles? Dimadick (talk) 08:06, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Categories do not link to articles (except occasionally to a major article which defines the category in the definition text on the category page), so removal of categories does not create orphan status. Softlavender (talk) 11:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Dimadick may mean "would the deletion leave any articles uncategorized?" I've checked a sample and all were in plenty of other categories. DexDor ^(talk) 12:11, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per extremely well-put nomination. Softlavender (talk) 11:55, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:12, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: no consensus. bibliomaniac15 21:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Mayors of Berbera (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: There is no Category:Berbera. Should we start creating categories up the tree to Category:Somaliland politicians? BTW, there are also Category:Mayors of Borama, Category:Mayors of Burao, Category:Mayors of Erigavo, Category:Mayors of Hargeisa and Category:Mayors of Las Anod with the same problem. Fuddle (talk) 10:53, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - there is no requirement for every conceivable parent to exist. There is Berbera. Oculi (talk) 12:53, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. There is no need to merge, both articles are already in Category:Mayors of places in Somaliland (which should have been the parent category, by the way). Marcocapelle (talk) 17:34, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per WP:BIAS and as a pertinent category which echoes other categorisation schemes. Yes, it's a distant country little known to westerners, but that's not a reason to start deleting. For the record, we have similar categories for cities in North America with a smaller population than Berbera; eg. Burlington, VT or Summerside, PEI; and there's a whole category tree starting at Category:Mayors by country... All of the cities given seem to be significant in some form or the other; Berbera was a former capital; the others are also current capitals (regional or national). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 01:10, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• This is not a case of bias (unless positive bias of English-speaking countries, but remember this is English-speaking Wikipedia). This phenomenon happens in every country, for example there is also no Category:Mayors of Namur for mayors of Namur. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:49, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - it seems to me to be part of Category:Mayors by city, to which the 'unless' clause of WP:SMALLCAT applies. Category:Mayors by city in the United States contains many subcats with 2 or 3 members. I also think it is BIAS, as there will have been other notable mayors who do not yet have articles. Berbera has a population of 60,000; Hargeisa (mentioned in the nom) has 2 million (acc to its infobox). A mayor of Hargeisa is surely automatically notable. (I have already opined, above.) Oculi (talk) 10:25, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The 'unless' clause does not apply, there are a huge amount of mayors articles directly in a Category:Mayors of places in x where x is a country or a first-level administrative subdivision. Which is better so, because with many smaller places it would merely lead to a forest of SMALLCATs. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:49, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete. bibliomaniac15 22:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Music disambiguation pages (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: Almost unused; not sure WP:WikiProject Music intends to populate this. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:46, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Seems to me like a perfectly valid sub-category of Category:Disambiguation pages. Deletion is not cleanup (in article space or otherwise) and I'm quite sure there's more than four music disambig pages; there's no WP:DEADLINE anyway. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 19:58, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And it's certainly not a requirement for me to dig through disambiguation pages and find ones which are music-related, but 10 seconds of looking around found this, as an example; and there's surely more to come if instead of "delete it" a little of "fix it" is preferred. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:03, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Dab pages (by definition) are not about a particular topic - even if currently all the linked articles fall within one topic (it's those articles that should be categorized). If editors want to note that a dab page is of interest to a particular wikiproject then that should be on the talk page. See previous CFDs (some examples). DexDor ^(talk) 06:10, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

None of the two discussions you mention seem to be about as large topics as music. One is about "Saint Petersburg" (what are there disambiguation pages for in a single city is beyond me, but ok); and the other was deleted because it was redundant to other categorisation. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:16, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Those discussions include comments such as "we don't need an entire tree mirroring the category tree with disambiguation pages about every conceivable category. ". Note: RandomCanadian has now been blocked. DexDor ^(talk) 09:52, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• We already have Category:Disambig-Class Pop music articles, Category:Disambig-Class biography (musicians) articles, Category:Disambig-Class Canadian music articles, Category:Disambig-Class Country Music articles, Category:Disambig-Class song articles and many others. There are over 600 pages in those categories. If WikiProject Music want to track dab pages that are of interest to them then that's how they should do it. The edit summary when the category was created ("This is absolutely necessary"), the lack of inlinks and the fact that so few pages have been placed in the category suggest that it was created for the wrong reasons. DexDor ^(talk) 06:25, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:OVERLAPCAT, per DexDor above. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: rename. to Category:Tanning (beauty treatment). bibliomaniac15 22:35, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Tanning to Category:Skin tanning

Nominator's rationale: to disambiguate it from Category:Tanning (leather) (see Tanning (leather)). BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:53, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Still ambiguous - Category:Tanning (leather) is "Skin tanning" too! "Cosmetic tanning" perhaps, or "Tanning (beauty treatment)", if we're allowed that. Johnbod (talk) 00:23, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Duh! Yes, Johnbod, "skin tanning" doesn't help much. I think both of your suggestions are an improvement. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:03, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename somehow to avoid ambiguity. Marcocapelle (talk) 01:10, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Returning to plump for Category:Tanning (beauty treatment). Johnbod (talk) 21:21, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Stress (biological and psychological). For now, this seems like the option with the most support behind it. bibliomaniac15 21:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose renaming Category:Stress to Category:Stress (biological and psychological)

Nominator's rationale: to disambiguate it from the related concepts of Stress (mechanics), Stress (linguistics)/Category:Stress (linguistics) and the many other topics listed at the dab page Stress.

The bare title Category:Stress should be re-created as a {{Category disambiguation}} page. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:11, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Question, would it be possible to split the category to Category:Stress (biology) and Category:Psychological stress per main articles Stress (biology) and Psychological stress? Marcocapelle (talk) 01:18, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Marcocapelle, that might be a good solution ... but are the two topics easily separable? I am no expert, but I thought that for example psychological stress could have physiological consequences such as heart attacks? I don't know this topic area well enough to offer a !vote either way on whether such a split is viable. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:06, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @BrownHairedGirl and DexDor: with the split, Category:Psychological stress (as the cause) could become the parent category of Category:Stress (biology) (as biological symptoms). So by default, an article would be put in the former, while only if the article is primarily about biological symptoms (e.g. Freezing behavior) it would be put in Category:Stress (biology). Put it differently, but with the same effect, Category:Stress could be renamed to Category:Psychological stress and a new subcategory Category:Stress (biology) could be created. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:52, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm no expert in this either, but if psychology is a subset of biology then your plan doesn't look right. Having 3 clearly named categories (mechanics/biology/linguistics) would be a good start. DexDor ^(talk) 09:03, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename e.g. to Category:Stress (biology). DexDor ^(talk) 12:08, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I am withdrawing my split suggestion. After reading a substantial number of articles I think there are four larger topics within this category, namely: 1) types of stress, 2) scientific study of stress (theories and measurement), 3) stress management, and 4) biological aspects of stress (e.g. hormones, brains). Now while the latter topic clearly relates to Stress (biology), the former three are not clearly just about psychology or just about biology. So Category:Stress (biological and psychological) as nominated sounds like a good solution. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:55, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom and consensus. Not opposed to renaming this again if a better idea comes to people. (e.g.: Biology of stress, Physiology of stress). Whatever distinguishes it from the mechanical and linguistic concepts. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:33, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete Timrollpickering (talk) 19:10, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Hyborian Age deities (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: This would almost be a speedy deletion, but there is one off-topic article in here for some reason. Either way, it's at best a WP:SMALLCAT that will never have any notable articles in it, because none of them have substantial coverage in third party sources. This is subject matter that is included in articles on other topics. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:11, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The only article included is not about a deity. Dimadick (talk) 08:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:SMALLCAT. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:17, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:30, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: merge and rename with both ultimately ending up at Category:Fictional food and drink (C2C with Category:Food and drink). bibliomaniac15 03:22, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Propose deleting Category:Fictional drinks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  

Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT that will never have more than two notable articles -- currently Duff Beer and Ambrosia. These are very much the exception, and you'll otherwise never find enough substantial coverage in third party sources to write an article about a fictional beverage. Most of them remain background details or easter eggs. There is also a list of otherwise non-notable drinks sourced to primary sources. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with Category:Fictional foods as Category:Fictional foods and drinks, with no prejudice against re-creation if it's needed - I can see this possibly growing. I was quite surprised, for instance, to see that Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster is currently only a redirect. Grutness...wha? 04:10, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Fictional foods and drinks would be a helpful category. Rathfelder (talk) 08:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural comment, I have tagged Category:Fictional foods for renaming. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:19, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: withdrawn (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 12:53, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

:* Propose deleting Category:Jamaican people of Syrian-Jewish descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The only person in this category, created by a blocked WP:SOCK @Hus12345:, is singer Bob Marley and in Bob Marley#Personal life there is nothing about him having anything to do with "Syria" or being "Jewish" just that he joined the Rastafari for "some years". This is either a trespass of WP:HOAX or WP:NOTMADEUP or both. IZAK (talk) 00:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @IZAK: the article says that his father Norval Marley "was a white Jamaican originally from Sussex, whose family claimed to have Syrian Jewish origins". Marcocapelle (talk) 20:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Marcocapelle: Oh, I missed that line, and it has three refs yet. So I will withdraw this nomination. Thanks for the sharp eyes. IZAK (talk) 21:13, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• NOMINATION WITHDRAWN by IZAK (talk) 21:13, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.