Category:Terrorist incidents in the Sinai Peninsula in 2016[edit]
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.
Dual upmerge per nomination's rationale. Neutralitytalk 16:09, 4 March 2017 (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:relisted here. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:24, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The two categories cover the same topic. CoolieCoolster (talk) 01:23, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This proposal moves Articles to Pages; and the following moves Pages to Articles. Should the two not be consistent? Twiceuponatime (talk) 11:11, 3 March 2017 (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 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. – FayenaticLondon 11:41, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The guideline is not very consistent in its phrasing. The next line says "realistic potential for growth", including an example that clearly illustrates the reality check, this seems to be a more useful criterion for the purpose of easy navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Implication is that these "treasure troves" may be merged into the "treasure" category. But also in this treasure troves tree the country subcats are mostly poorly populated, with a big exception for the United Kingdom. By period is a much better distinction for treasures. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:41, 6 March 2017 (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. – FayenaticLondon 11:36, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:NONDEF (and WP:SMALLCAT), in most cases it concerns a secondary title of a prince who has become notable as a prince of a larger principality (e.g. Kiev or Novgorod), in these cases there is no need to merge. This doesn't apply however to three articles, as indicated, which should be moved to the parent category if the categories are deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 00:54, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The categories lists the heads of state of a number of principalities in Kievan Rus'. These are not "secondary titles", but titles which were held by individuals who moved from principality to principality during their career. Should we also delete the Category:Princes of Wales, because most princes of Wales were later crowned king of England, Great Britain or the UK? Borsoka (talk) 04:05, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes we should or at least purge that category, only keeping biographies of princes of Wales for whom the characteristic was defining (i.e. who haven't become king afterwards). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:22, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should not. Why do you think that an individual could not be listed in multiple categories? Borsoka (talk) 11:28, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've never said so. I would be perfectly happy with biographies being in the categories of Grand Prince of Kiev and Prince of Novgorord if they are about people who were a prince of both. But please note that we categorize defining characteristics only. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:29, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What is a defining category? For instance, Elizabeth II, is best known as the Queen of the UK. Should we delete all categories referring to her role as the head of state of about a dozen realms (such as Belize, Canada)? Why should we ignore the 26-year-long period of the life of Edward VIII when he was Prince of Wales, if he was monarch of the UK only for 11 months? Borsoka (talk) 17:40, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for you proposal. I read them. And I do not understand your above proposal and remarks, because "A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently define". Do you think that a man who was prince of Tmutorakan from cca. 1064 to cca. 1068 and prince of Chernigov from cca. 1068 to cca. 1078 is only mentioned as prince of Chernigov in books dedicated to his life or the history of Rus'? Do you think that the title of "prince of Wales" of the future British monarchs is not mentioned in reliable sources dedicated to them? Borsoka (talk) 03:55, 3 March 2017 (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.
