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: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Categories contain only 2-3 articles and aren't likely to significantly grow in the near future. No opposition to recreation if more articles exist. User:Namiba 13:33, 14 September 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.
The result of the discussion was:keep. This is not "no consensus", because the rationale against the nomination seems to have persuaded the later participants. – FayenaticLondon 10:50, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per main article kunoichi and marking it as a specific gendered occupation. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:17, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. To match the main article. Dimadick (talk) 16:14, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose renaming the common easily understood Category:Fictional female ninja into a name most won't recognize or be able to pronounce. This is why we don't call ninja by the more proper name of shinobi, we go by common easily understood by English speaking audience names. Ninja#EtymologyDreamFocus 23:20, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Then please start an WP:RM on kunoichi asking for it to be changed to female ninja. If so, I will have no problem leaving the category as is. Of course, you and I both know that is heavily doubtful to succeed. If that is the case, why should the category be a different name than the main article? ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:40, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Did you actually read that article? Calling these fictional characters kunoichi would be a very clear case of WP:OR. - jc37 15:20, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, most articles in this category about American fiction use "assassin" or "female ninja" while the few articles about Japanese fiction use "kunoichi". Marcocapelle (talk) 04:44, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose following the argumentation of Dream Focus. I think it's good that kunoichi is linked in the description (which could be expanded by a short explanation, if this is deemed helpful), but ninja as category name is much more helpful for persons like me. - I sure have seen ninjas featured in (American) pieces of fiction, but had never heard of that term before. Daranios (talk) 20:15, 26 September 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.
The result of the discussion was:keep. – FayenaticLondon 10:37, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:NONDEF, gender is not defining for fictional athletes unless the occupation is gendered (there is a category for that already). Category:Fictional female ninja should be renamed as Category:Fictional kunoichi, marking it as a specific gendered occupation, and thus it is defining and should not be deleted. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge articles into relevant gender-free categories. No Great Shaker (talk) 12:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Aren't sports teams divided by gender anyway? Dimadick (talk) 16:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We're talking about individuals, not sports teams. While they may be on an all-male or all-female team, their gender is not defining for the character. Anyway, not all bodybuilders or martial artists, or sportspeople in general are on a "team", so that does not broadly apply. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 16:29, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As mentioned in AFDs the nominator started, Wikipedia divides a lot of people into gender. Category:Female bodybuildersCategory:Female martial artists etc. The real ones are divided by gender, the fictional ones should be as well. Also oppose renaming the common easily understood Category:Fictional female ninja into a name most won't recognize or be able to pronounce. DreamFocus 23:09, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the Martial arts ones - not per nom - but as just waaaay too broad. For one thing this mixes combatants in with sports enthusiasts. For another, both fencing and Sumo wrestling are martial arts. This is really broad. I think this is broad enough to be considered WP:SHAREDNAME. Oppose the rest. (sportspeople cats should be tagged with Template:container / Template:Diffusion.) - jc37 16:21, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Like Oculi, I think this should follow the division existing for real persons. Daranios (talk) 20:11, 26 September 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:Psychiatric diagnosis: marginal or unestablished diagnostic categories[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: The current category name is in a strange subset format that I haven't seen elsewhere on here. ~ฅ(ↀωↀ=)neko-channyan 05:58, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They're not quite miscellaneous because their whole thing is how none of the disorders in this category are formally described ~ฅ(ↀωↀ=)neko-channyan 23:25, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Marcocapelle.Tom (LT) (talk) 23:15, 21 September 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.
The result of the discussion was:merge. I checked the members and they are all Indo-Trinidadians, except for one who I re-categorised as being of that descent. – FayenaticLondon 09:19, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I've never really been sure what to make of this category, since there's no Hindavi or Hindavi people article to help understand. It is used as a category for Indo-Trinidadian people, and is a subcat of category:Trinidad and Tobago people of Indian descent. The first problem is that I've never heard us described that way. Hindavi redirects to a dab page, which lists Hindustani language as a possible target. But linguistically, Indo-Trinidadians were primarily Bhojpuri speakers; though commonly called "Hindi" in Trinidad and Tobago, Bhojpuri is an Eastern Indo-Aryan language while Hindustani is is classified as a Central Indo-Aryan language, so as I understand it, this category as applied is both incorrect and WP:OR. Guettarda (talk) 03:57, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, purging as necessary. All those I sampled were Indo-Trinidadian, except one Canadian politician who was of that descent. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:02, 14 September 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.
