Category:American television articles needing expert attention[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: Missed this one when I nominated the others here. There is no need to split the television articles into sub-categories as there are never that many articles in total in the main Category:Television articles needing expert attention. Gonnym (talk) 23:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Just N. (talk) 15:42, 26 May 2021 (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:17th-century Belgian Roman Catholic priests[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 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: Unneeded recently created subcategory of Category:Youth orchestras. Most notable youth orchestras are symphony orchestras – subcategorization into country/region is sufficient. Side note: creator made no attempt to put all youth symphony orchestra articles into their newly created category, nor did they they respond to an inquiry on their talk page. intforce (talk) 19:45, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Just N. (talk) 15:44, 26 May 2021 (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:Same reason: "We don't categorise cricketers by under-19 national teams". আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 15:49, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is slightly different to the Bangladesh U19 one that was deleted, as the WI have fielded (ho ho) an U19 team in their domestic tournaments, such as the 2016–17 Regional Super50. This only includes those who have played in their domestic competitions, and not the U19 World Cup, etc. LugnutsFire Walk with Me 16:38, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Lugnuts: Thanks. Please add the reason to the category, otherwise people will get confuse like me (maybe rename the category?). --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - I've updated the text on the category. Worst case, if this does get nominated again, we can refer to this CfD. LugnutsFire Walk with Me 16:59, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Lugnuts, this U19 team plays domestic cricket, players who have played for them in domestic competitions would be notable and so a suitable categorisation. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 12:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This U-19 team plays domestic cricket. I think that the creator of the category has only included those players who have played for U-19 team in only domestic cricket, not in U-19 World Cup. — A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 16:08, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to withdraw this nomination. --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2021 (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: A small category, so doesn't benefit from splitting into sub-LGBT categories as, for example, Category:Gay writers does with 1834 entries. A significant number of the entries are historical, so distinguishing gay from LGBT isn't easy. See also, discussion of gay nobility. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 11:36, 19 May 2021 (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:WP:SMALLCAT with only one entry. There are no other century categories for British sceptics, or any sceptics. Splitting the parent in century categories would not be a necessary step to help navigation at this stage as there are not so many articles. Place Clichy (talk) 08:58, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- Is there an ENGVAR issue here? If so, we should follow British usage, but leave a cat-redirect. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:38, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think that the ENGVAR issue affects the nominated category, which should be merged regardless of spelling under the rationale provided. There is currently a redirect from Category:Scepticism to Category:Skepticism, and children of Category:Skeptics by nationality seem to use either skeptics or sceptics depending on the local usage. Creating more redirects for national categories can be done without prior discussion at CfD if one feels the need. Place Clichy (talk) 15:31, 25 May 2021 (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:Fellows of the University of Madras[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.
We don't have a main article on Fellows of the University of Madras and the University of Madras article makes no mention of fellows. Most tellingly, none of the 3 biography articles in this category (1, 2, 3) even mention being a fellow (or the university at all) so whatever this was must not be very defining. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:36, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- These seem to be Hon. Fellowships, which is a NN award. If they were research (or teaching) fellows, they should be in a university staff category (but not in this case). Peterkingiron (talk) 16:52, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Just N. (talk) 15:45, 26 May 2021 (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:Fellows of the Edinburgh Obstetrical Society[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.
Delete per nom. --Just N. (talk) 15:45, 26 May 2021 (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.
