Category:Upper Mesopotamia under the Abbasid Caliphate[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.
The result of the discussion was:no consensus. – FayenaticLondon 23:24, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:purge and merge remnant, the larger amount of articles in this category consist of heads of the Syriac Orthodox Church settled in Antioch, so they are unrelated to the Abbasid Caliphate and they are not particularly about the region of Upper Mesopotamia. After purging the few articles left can be upmerged. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:09, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose quite a few of the articles are not of heads of the Syriac Church, however, and the region's history as part of the Abbasid empire is quite distinct to its history under the autonomous dynasties that followed it. Also, given that early Islamic history is generally not well covered in WP, it is a category with considerable room for expansion in content. Constantine ✍ 14:02, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In fact the few history articles in this category are about the second half of the 9th century when Upper Mesopotamia started to gain autonomy from the Abbasid Empire, so in that respect they are not very different from the period that followed. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:06, 15 February 2019 (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 parent, rename alumni category. – FayenaticLondon 23:01, 17 March 2019 (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:speedy deleted per WP:G7. Created by me to fill a redlink, and since it's no longer needed I have deleted it. (@Muhandes, in future just tag empty categories with {{db-c1}}). --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 16:24, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Was probably created by mistake, there was one erroneous usage of "German22". There is no need to track this bogus usage. Muhandes (talk) 16:12, 14 February 2019 (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.
Category:Association football player-coaches[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.
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary overcategorisation. We don't have a category for football coaches (assistants, as opposed to head coaches / managers), and even if we did there would be no need to further subcategorise by the player-coach role, which is an entirely unremarkable one held by many senior players. Jellyman (talk) 07:34, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Nzd(talk) 11:19, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I created this based on this discussion, but can't say I have particularly strong feelings either way. Nzd(talk) 11:19, 14 February 2019 (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.
Nominator's rationale:Eponymous category for a person without the volume of spinoff content needed to warrant one -- all that's here is his bog-standard "Paintings by" category, his biographical article itself, and one article about an art historian who's studied him (and is thus also a misfiling, because that represents categorization by association rather than Alma-Tadena being a defining characteristic of the historian). As always, every person with a biographical article does not automatically get one of these just because there are a few other related articles -- the test for needing one of these is if there's a lot of spinoff content that needs eponym-related categorization, but the necessary volume is not present here. Bearcat (talk) 00:07, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for Now My subjective interpretation of WP:OCEPON is 5 direct articles and there's only two here with little room for growth. No objection to recreating if I'm mistaken and 3 more articles ever appear RevelationDirect (talk) 00:59, 15 February 2019 (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.
