The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Have depopulated this category - placing previous members into category:live-bearing fish and subcategories category:viviparous fish and category:ovoviviparous fish. Also have created category:poeciliidae for those live-bearers that were of that taxonomic grouping and populated it. In effect have replaced 'live-bearers' with 'live-bearing fish' - reason - felt that there was some confusion involved with using the term 'live-bearers' as a category and that it did not cover other live bearing families eg sharks. HappyVR 23:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename Tim! 18:56, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This seems to cut off somewhat abruptly. The parent category is category:Recipients of formal honors. Chicheley 22:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge both. the wub "?!" 11:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
These categories don't fit into the global system, which is based mainly on subdivision by service (army, navy, airforce, marines) and on rank (eg. generals, officers, enlisted men) so I think it would be better to Merge them into Category:Swedish military people and start again on that basis. I have already made a move in the conventional direction by creating Category:Swedish soldiers and Category:Swedish generals. Chicheley 22:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
At first I was going to send this for speedy renaming to remove the capital "S", but on seeing that it is 8 months old but only contains Martin Luther King, I decided to bring it here. King is in such an array of overlapping categories that a reduction seems more useful than an increase. There are thousands of articles about people who were both democrats (in the global sense) and socialists, but apparently no-one has chosen to add any of them to this category since last October, and I can't help thinking that is a good thing, as every prominent politician is in a wide range of more specific categories without it. Chicheley 21:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename as per nom but delete Category:7th Heaven guest stars per Musicpvm and previous deletion of Category:Friends guest stars ( Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 March 4). the wub "?!" 23:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Most categories in
Category:Actors by series are named "Title actors."
—
Lady Aleena
talk/
contribs 21:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
reply
Note: Changed The West Wing cfr to reflect the exception. Thank you for showing me my error. - LA @ 21:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Question: Should those TV series with categories for "cast and crew" be renamed to "actors and crew," or should I leave them alone? -
LA @ 07:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was relist Tim! 18:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I was originally going to send this to speedy to lower-case the "S", but it is also necessary to specify which senate, in line with the intention of the category, as there are also senates in individual U.S. states. Chicheley 20:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I had removed Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as an incorrect categorization, but then started thinking that the two UN specialized agencies listed weren't really "charitable organizations". That leaves only International Planned Parenthood Federation, and that article is already in Category:Pro-choice organizations, also up for movement and not overcrowded. Given a concern I have over phrasing (I doubt any of these organizations cheerlead for abortion), I would suggest deletion unless a more defined alternative is suggested. BT 18:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge. the wub "?!" 11:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Superfluous category, as we already have a whole host of "district" categories; see Category:Districts of the United Kingdom — OwenBlacker 13:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge Tim! 17:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I thought I already listed this to be merged, but, yeah, this needs to be merged because almost the entirety of the Gym Leaders cat is in this wholly unnecessary subcat. Category:Gym Leaders still doesn't need any subcats, since it won't ever have more than a couple dozen articles (and currently has less than a dozen). - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 11:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was rename Tim! 17:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
To be consistent with Category:Works of art and Category:Stolen works of art. But I'm a little concerned since nominated category is meant to comprise all art forms (has subcategories for unfinished books, unfinished symphonies etc.) whereas it's not clear that these others are. — Blotwell 11:13, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename Tim! 17:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Rename to avoid confusion with the parent cat, Category:Pokémon Trading Card Game. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 11:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename Tim! 17:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Sub-categories of Category:Cities in the United States, such as this category proposed for renaming, are not named "American _". They are named "_ cities in the United States", like Category:Leaders of cities in the United States, or Category:Coastal cities in the United States. This category is proposed for renaming for consistency. Kurieeto 10:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename Tim! 17:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
To be consistent with the naming of the rest of the subcats of Category:Pokémon. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 10:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
"Revenge films" isn't a genre to my knowledge, and none of the articles in this category say anything to explain the use of this category. There's also no article to explain what trend is being illustrated here, and no criteria to explain this category's use. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 07:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
There is no article about Broadway opera. I think the term "Broadway opera" came from Kurt Weil. The members of this category seem to be here for arbitrary subjective reasons. Perhaps the best way to handle these cross-over productions is to categorize them both as musicals and operas when appropriate. -- Samuel Wantman 07:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This category lists people from a relatively small town in Massachusetts, contains one article on Rose Kennedy, and has little potential for expansion beyond members of her family which already has a Wikipedia category dedicated to them. -- TommyBoy 06:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was 'rename to Category:Fictional warrior races and remove non-fictional entries. -- RobertG ♬ talk 16:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Hodge podge mixture of reality and fiction (at least going by the description). Delete or at least rename to Fictional warrior races and remove any non-fictional ones. Tim! 06:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was No consensus to rename -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I know this just came up a couple of weeks ago, but it seems as though a consensus was emerging for this rename. I'm hoping that people can read the previous discussions and limit any response to whether this rename would be acceptable. This rename would make the category NPOV and it would therefore be possible to verify that people should be included in the category by looking to see if claims of anti-Semitism are cited in an individual's article. -- Samuel Wantman 06:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep Tim! 17:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Relative lack of notable content and little potential for future growth. Merge to? -- Stratadrake 05:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. -- RobertG ♬ talk 16:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Same as Hong Kong below, to bring in line with similar categories. Caerwine Caerwhine 05:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was Keep Tim! 17:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
NPOV. / Slarre 05:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. -- RobertG ♬ talk 16:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Fix acronym and capitalization; bring into line with Category:United States Department of Defense agencies Paul 05:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. -- RobertG ♬ talk 16:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
To bring in line with similar categories. Caerwine Caerwhine 04:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename all Tim! 17:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Propose mass renaming of the following categories:
Rationale: The school's official athletics site, goblueraiders.com, consistently uses "Middle Tennessee" instead of "Middle Tennessee State". — Dale Arnett 03:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Re-list to include all 9 categories below instead of just three – Gurch 18:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I hope that the nominator and the other contributors don't mind me lumping these three together. Since they are so closely related they should be. They are also being lumped to get a reveiw.
—
Lady Aleena
talk/
contribs 09:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
reply
Correct so far? If so that would lead to these categories to be renamed also to be consistant.
For consistency with the rest of Category:Television series by studio. Perhaps this should stay where it is, but the suggested rename would bring it into line with the others. Neutral. SeventyThree( Talk) 03:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
For consistency with the rest of Category:Television series by studio. It looks a bit nasty, but Procter & Gamble Productions is the full name. SeventyThree( Talk) 03:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
It is how other related cats are named. CoolKatt number 99999 02:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Empty after 5 months. No related changes listed, though I don't know whether changes in removed articles, if there were any, would show up. Doubtful usefulness Chicheley 02:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was relisted Tim! 17:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Should actually be a speedy merge. Category:Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios series was created in April 2006, for apparently no reason at all, and various series are staggered between both categories. -- FuriousFreddy 02:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename to Category:Fictional evil scientists. -- RobertG ♬ talk 16:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Although the fact that it is a subcategory of " Category:Fictional scientists" makes things fairly clear, the rename nevertheless describes the category more precisely, and may help discourge people from categorizing real-life scientists with it. 131.107.0.81 01:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Have depopulated this category - placing previous members into category:live-bearing fish and subcategories category:viviparous fish and category:ovoviviparous fish. Also have created category:poeciliidae for those live-bearers that were of that taxonomic grouping and populated it. In effect have replaced 'live-bearers' with 'live-bearing fish' - reason - felt that there was some confusion involved with using the term 'live-bearers' as a category and that it did not cover other live bearing families eg sharks. HappyVR 23:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename Tim! 18:56, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This seems to cut off somewhat abruptly. The parent category is category:Recipients of formal honors. Chicheley 22:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge both. the wub "?!" 11:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
These categories don't fit into the global system, which is based mainly on subdivision by service (army, navy, airforce, marines) and on rank (eg. generals, officers, enlisted men) so I think it would be better to Merge them into Category:Swedish military people and start again on that basis. I have already made a move in the conventional direction by creating Category:Swedish soldiers and Category:Swedish generals. Chicheley 22:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
At first I was going to send this for speedy renaming to remove the capital "S", but on seeing that it is 8 months old but only contains Martin Luther King, I decided to bring it here. King is in such an array of overlapping categories that a reduction seems more useful than an increase. There are thousands of articles about people who were both democrats (in the global sense) and socialists, but apparently no-one has chosen to add any of them to this category since last October, and I can't help thinking that is a good thing, as every prominent politician is in a wide range of more specific categories without it. Chicheley 21:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename as per nom but delete Category:7th Heaven guest stars per Musicpvm and previous deletion of Category:Friends guest stars ( Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 March 4). the wub "?!" 23:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Most categories in
Category:Actors by series are named "Title actors."
—
Lady Aleena
talk/
contribs 21:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
reply
Note: Changed The West Wing cfr to reflect the exception. Thank you for showing me my error. - LA @ 21:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Question: Should those TV series with categories for "cast and crew" be renamed to "actors and crew," or should I leave them alone? -
LA @ 07:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was relist Tim! 18:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I was originally going to send this to speedy to lower-case the "S", but it is also necessary to specify which senate, in line with the intention of the category, as there are also senates in individual U.S. states. Chicheley 20:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I had removed Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as an incorrect categorization, but then started thinking that the two UN specialized agencies listed weren't really "charitable organizations". That leaves only International Planned Parenthood Federation, and that article is already in Category:Pro-choice organizations, also up for movement and not overcrowded. Given a concern I have over phrasing (I doubt any of these organizations cheerlead for abortion), I would suggest deletion unless a more defined alternative is suggested. BT 18:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge. the wub "?!" 11:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Superfluous category, as we already have a whole host of "district" categories; see Category:Districts of the United Kingdom — OwenBlacker 13:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge Tim! 17:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I thought I already listed this to be merged, but, yeah, this needs to be merged because almost the entirety of the Gym Leaders cat is in this wholly unnecessary subcat. Category:Gym Leaders still doesn't need any subcats, since it won't ever have more than a couple dozen articles (and currently has less than a dozen). - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 11:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was rename Tim! 17:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
To be consistent with Category:Works of art and Category:Stolen works of art. But I'm a little concerned since nominated category is meant to comprise all art forms (has subcategories for unfinished books, unfinished symphonies etc.) whereas it's not clear that these others are. — Blotwell 11:13, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename Tim! 17:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Rename to avoid confusion with the parent cat, Category:Pokémon Trading Card Game. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 11:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename Tim! 17:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Sub-categories of Category:Cities in the United States, such as this category proposed for renaming, are not named "American _". They are named "_ cities in the United States", like Category:Leaders of cities in the United States, or Category:Coastal cities in the United States. This category is proposed for renaming for consistency. Kurieeto 10:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename Tim! 17:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
To be consistent with the naming of the rest of the subcats of Category:Pokémon. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 10:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
"Revenge films" isn't a genre to my knowledge, and none of the articles in this category say anything to explain the use of this category. There's also no article to explain what trend is being illustrated here, and no criteria to explain this category's use. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 07:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
There is no article about Broadway opera. I think the term "Broadway opera" came from Kurt Weil. The members of this category seem to be here for arbitrary subjective reasons. Perhaps the best way to handle these cross-over productions is to categorize them both as musicals and operas when appropriate. -- Samuel Wantman 07:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Keep -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
This category lists people from a relatively small town in Massachusetts, contains one article on Rose Kennedy, and has little potential for expansion beyond members of her family which already has a Wikipedia category dedicated to them. -- TommyBoy 06:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was 'rename to Category:Fictional warrior races and remove non-fictional entries. -- RobertG ♬ talk 16:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Hodge podge mixture of reality and fiction (at least going by the description). Delete or at least rename to Fictional warrior races and remove any non-fictional ones. Tim! 06:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was No consensus to rename -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I know this just came up a couple of weeks ago, but it seems as though a consensus was emerging for this rename. I'm hoping that people can read the previous discussions and limit any response to whether this rename would be acceptable. This rename would make the category NPOV and it would therefore be possible to verify that people should be included in the category by looking to see if claims of anti-Semitism are cited in an individual's article. -- Samuel Wantman 06:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep Tim! 17:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Relative lack of notable content and little potential for future growth. Merge to? -- Stratadrake 05:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. -- RobertG ♬ talk 16:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Same as Hong Kong below, to bring in line with similar categories. Caerwine Caerwhine 05:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was Keep Tim! 17:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
NPOV. / Slarre 05:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. -- RobertG ♬ talk 16:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Fix acronym and capitalization; bring into line with Category:United States Department of Defense agencies Paul 05:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. -- RobertG ♬ talk 16:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
To bring in line with similar categories. Caerwine Caerwhine 04:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename all Tim! 17:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Propose mass renaming of the following categories:
Rationale: The school's official athletics site, goblueraiders.com, consistently uses "Middle Tennessee" instead of "Middle Tennessee State". — Dale Arnett 03:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Re-list to include all 9 categories below instead of just three – Gurch 18:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I hope that the nominator and the other contributors don't mind me lumping these three together. Since they are so closely related they should be. They are also being lumped to get a reveiw.
—
Lady Aleena
talk/
contribs 09:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
reply
Correct so far? If so that would lead to these categories to be renamed also to be consistant.
For consistency with the rest of Category:Television series by studio. Perhaps this should stay where it is, but the suggested rename would bring it into line with the others. Neutral. SeventyThree( Talk) 03:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
For consistency with the rest of Category:Television series by studio. It looks a bit nasty, but Procter & Gamble Productions is the full name. SeventyThree( Talk) 03:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
It is how other related cats are named. CoolKatt number 99999 02:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 04:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Empty after 5 months. No related changes listed, though I don't know whether changes in removed articles, if there were any, would show up. Doubtful usefulness Chicheley 02:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was relisted Tim! 17:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Should actually be a speedy merge. Category:Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios series was created in April 2006, for apparently no reason at all, and various series are staggered between both categories. -- FuriousFreddy 02:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename to Category:Fictional evil scientists. -- RobertG ♬ talk 16:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Although the fact that it is a subcategory of " Category:Fictional scientists" makes things fairly clear, the rename nevertheless describes the category more precisely, and may help discourge people from categorizing real-life scientists with it. 131.107.0.81 01:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply