< October 15 | October 17 > |
---|
The result of the debate was Delete. — Centrx→ talk • 20:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Caused over 1 million deaths (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete, was just created today, smells POV, and is I believe completely unnecessary. Plus, it is quite inflammatory, as I can already forsee edit wars on the subject... Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 20:05, 16 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Rename both per the fact that not all politicians are leaders. Nishkid 64 23:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC) reply
"Leader" is being used very misleadingly here, essentially to mean "important politician", which is a little redundant, given the notability threshold. These are the main BNP/INC categories, and the parent and siblings use "politicians". Alai 19:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge.
the wub
"?!" 13:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
Category:Battleships of the United States Navy into
Category:Battleships of the United States
The result of the debate was delete.
the wub
"?!" 14:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
Category:Notable YouTube users (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
The result of the debate was rename.
the wub
"?!" 14:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
Category:Word lists to be moved to Wiktionary to
Category:Word lists to be copied to Wiktionary
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Triracial girl groups (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete, There have been only 2 members of this category for about 5 months now.
Chsf 18:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:World cities (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Category:Alpha world cities (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Category:Beta world cities (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Category:Gamma world cities (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete. Possible recreation of previously deleted category (for the first one, only). (There were deleted edits, but no entry in the deletion log, as far as I can tell....) Categories describing one organization's categorization of cities. Would be better off as a list; and, in fact, it is a list in the
Global city article. —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:32, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete, "celebrities" is an extremely POV word. These categories are just unnecessary. Most of the cats state "Individuals should not be included in this category unless they do not fit into another occupational category". Every person in these categories is already placed into another more specific category. -- musicpvm 15:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not really a style like jazz. Also, contains only Kenny G.-- Mike Selinker 14:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:23, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Leaders of alleged cults ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) There is already a Category:Cult leaders, with specific criteria. This category is an attempt to 'label' certain people under the controversial label of "cult". A POV magnet: POV pushing via categorization. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 14:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC) reply
(restored deleted vote)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:M51 subgroup (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete - The original creator had found a website that conjectured that the
M101 Group and the M51 Group were both part of a single group of galaxies. However, most scientific references (such as those used in the M101 Group article) indicate that the M101 Group and M51 Group are separate entities. Therefore, keeping the M51 subgroup category is not useful.
George J. Bendo 11:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:M101 subgroup (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete - The original creator had found a website that conjectured that the
M101 Group and the M51 Group were both part of a single group of galaxies. However, most scientific references (such as those used in the
M101 Group article) indicate that the M101 Group and M51 Group are separate entities. Therefore, keeping the M101 subgroup category is not useful.
George J. Bendo 11:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated -- Kbdank71 16:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:W. S. Gilbert plays into Category:Works by W. S. Gilbert
The result of the debate was Moved As these were not cfd discussions that can be closed in a normal matter, but rather proposals for new speedy criteria, they have been moved to Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion#Proposals for new csd criteria for categories, a more appropriate venue conducive to further discussion. Hiding Talk 14:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I think the following should be a new criteria for speedy deletion, per many examples on CfD lately. This isn't the same as CSD A7, because it's about the actions of the performers, not the performers themselves (not to mention that it's for a category, not an article). Let's call this proposed CSD C6.
Some examples:
-
-
Support or Oppose: Should CSD C6 - Performers by performance (proposed above) be expanded to include:
-
-
-
Support or Oppose: Should CSD C6 - Performers by performance (proposed above) be expanded to include:
-
-
The result of the debate was no consensus -- Kbdank71 16:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Towns in Gippsland, Australia (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Not needed.
Category:Towns in Victoria is sufficient.--
cj |
talk 04:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated -- Kbdank71 16:16, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Superman locations into Category:DC Comics locations
The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated -- Kbdank71 16:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Wonder Woman locations into Category:DC Comics locations, et cetera
The result of the debate was Deleted. The category was deleted on 00:50, 18 October 2006 by
USer:MPF as over-categorisation.
Hiding
Talk 14:45, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Category:Upcoming segregates of Olacaceae (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
reply
category is patent nonsense.
KP Botany 00:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
Delete Category is a category of plant families that may be formed if the "APG III" (Angiosperm Phylogeny Group III), an entity that currently doesn't appear to exist other than on Wikipedia pages, is ever created and if it takes up the question of those families and if it decides that those families should be split. In other words, it's POV speculation about the future results of future original research by a future entity. It's generally a bad idea to have a category for "Plant families that ... are likely to be recognized in APG III" should APG III ever exist. It's pre-original research.
< October 15 | October 17 > |
---|
The result of the debate was Delete. — Centrx→ talk • 20:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Caused over 1 million deaths (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete, was just created today, smells POV, and is I believe completely unnecessary. Plus, it is quite inflammatory, as I can already forsee edit wars on the subject... Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 20:05, 16 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Rename both per the fact that not all politicians are leaders. Nishkid 64 23:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC) reply
"Leader" is being used very misleadingly here, essentially to mean "important politician", which is a little redundant, given the notability threshold. These are the main BNP/INC categories, and the parent and siblings use "politicians". Alai 19:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge.
the wub
"?!" 13:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
Category:Battleships of the United States Navy into
Category:Battleships of the United States
The result of the debate was delete.
the wub
"?!" 14:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
Category:Notable YouTube users (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
The result of the debate was rename.
the wub
"?!" 14:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
Category:Word lists to be moved to Wiktionary to
Category:Word lists to be copied to Wiktionary
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Triracial girl groups (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete, There have been only 2 members of this category for about 5 months now.
Chsf 18:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:World cities (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Category:Alpha world cities (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Category:Beta world cities (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Category:Gamma world cities (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete. Possible recreation of previously deleted category (for the first one, only). (There were deleted edits, but no entry in the deletion log, as far as I can tell....) Categories describing one organization's categorization of cities. Would be better off as a list; and, in fact, it is a list in the
Global city article. —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:32, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete, "celebrities" is an extremely POV word. These categories are just unnecessary. Most of the cats state "Individuals should not be included in this category unless they do not fit into another occupational category". Every person in these categories is already placed into another more specific category. -- musicpvm 15:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Not really a style like jazz. Also, contains only Kenny G.-- Mike Selinker 14:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:23, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Leaders of alleged cults ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) There is already a Category:Cult leaders, with specific criteria. This category is an attempt to 'label' certain people under the controversial label of "cult". A POV magnet: POV pushing via categorization. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 14:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC) reply
(restored deleted vote)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:M51 subgroup (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete - The original creator had found a website that conjectured that the
M101 Group and the M51 Group were both part of a single group of galaxies. However, most scientific references (such as those used in the M101 Group article) indicate that the M101 Group and M51 Group are separate entities. Therefore, keeping the M51 subgroup category is not useful.
George J. Bendo 11:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 16:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:M101 subgroup (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete - The original creator had found a website that conjectured that the
M101 Group and the M51 Group were both part of a single group of galaxies. However, most scientific references (such as those used in the
M101 Group article) indicate that the M101 Group and M51 Group are separate entities. Therefore, keeping the M101 subgroup category is not useful.
George J. Bendo 11:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated -- Kbdank71 16:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:W. S. Gilbert plays into Category:Works by W. S. Gilbert
The result of the debate was Moved As these were not cfd discussions that can be closed in a normal matter, but rather proposals for new speedy criteria, they have been moved to Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion#Proposals for new csd criteria for categories, a more appropriate venue conducive to further discussion. Hiding Talk 14:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I think the following should be a new criteria for speedy deletion, per many examples on CfD lately. This isn't the same as CSD A7, because it's about the actions of the performers, not the performers themselves (not to mention that it's for a category, not an article). Let's call this proposed CSD C6.
Some examples:
-
-
Support or Oppose: Should CSD C6 - Performers by performance (proposed above) be expanded to include:
-
-
-
Support or Oppose: Should CSD C6 - Performers by performance (proposed above) be expanded to include:
-
-
The result of the debate was no consensus -- Kbdank71 16:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Towns in Gippsland, Australia (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Not needed.
Category:Towns in Victoria is sufficient.--
cj |
talk 04:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated -- Kbdank71 16:16, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Superman locations into Category:DC Comics locations
The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated -- Kbdank71 16:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Category:Wonder Woman locations into Category:DC Comics locations, et cetera
The result of the debate was Deleted. The category was deleted on 00:50, 18 October 2006 by
USer:MPF as over-categorisation.
Hiding
Talk 14:45, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Category:Upcoming segregates of Olacaceae (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
reply
category is patent nonsense.
KP Botany 00:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
Delete Category is a category of plant families that may be formed if the "APG III" (Angiosperm Phylogeny Group III), an entity that currently doesn't appear to exist other than on Wikipedia pages, is ever created and if it takes up the question of those families and if it decides that those families should be split. In other words, it's POV speculation about the future results of future original research by a future entity. It's generally a bad idea to have a category for "Plant families that ... are likely to be recognized in APG III" should APG III ever exist. It's pre-original research.