The result of the debate was Speedy rename. -- Rick Block ( talk) 04:32, 25 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Misspelled for Darkwing Duck characters. Supermorff 22:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 15:46, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
All empty. -- Kbdank71 20:55, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename as nominated -- Kbdank71 15:47, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
As everyone who frequents CFD knows, we strongly discourage abbreviations in category names. Therefore, I am thinking that we could use the same title that Encarta uses. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:24, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge as nominated -- Kbdank71 15:35, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
There is an incomplete and very sparsely populated group of categories for American professional wrestlers by state. They appear to have been created in response to concern about the size of the parent category. This was previously marked with the "verylarge" template, which states that articles should all be moved from the parent category to the subcategory. This is highly undesirable as state affinities are of little relevance to professional wrestling and subcategorisation hinders access to the articles. I probably create more subcategories than any other user, but I still feel that there are some categories for which useful subcategorisation is not possible. If such categories get very large, that's just something we have to live with.
Merge all into Category:American professional wrestlers CalJW 14:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 15:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Redundant and empty category - proper category is Category:Unaccredited institutions of higher learning. Willmcw 07:15, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep -- Kbdank71 15:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
This category is inherently POV. The term "born-again Christians" is subjective, the interpretation varies among churches and between specific individuals. I don't believe a concrete definition could be made or agreed upon. I vote delete. Foofy 06:35, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete, empty -- Kbdank71 15:30, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Duplicate category CG janitor 05:11, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep -- Kbdank71 15:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
All of these together encompass 4 articles on cruisers, which realistically only need one category. Joshbaumgartner 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus -- Kbdank71 15:28, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Per previous CfDs, exchange country adjective with noun. Joshbaumgartner 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep -- Kbdank71 15:26, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Not enough articles to warrant sub-categorization. Joshbaumgartner 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus -- Kbdank71 15:24, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Excess extra categories to get to one article. New category in line with previous CfD discussion regarding Category:Naval ships of China. Joshbaumgartner 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge as nominated -- Kbdank71 15:21, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Seperate category tree for classes not needed, and is not used for most country's, including big ones. Submarines category is sufficient for articles on both individual submarines and submarine classes. Joshbaumgartner 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was Speedy rename. -- Rick Block ( talk) 04:32, 25 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Misspelled for Darkwing Duck characters. Supermorff 22:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 15:46, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
All empty. -- Kbdank71 20:55, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename as nominated -- Kbdank71 15:47, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
As everyone who frequents CFD knows, we strongly discourage abbreviations in category names. Therefore, I am thinking that we could use the same title that Encarta uses. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:24, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge as nominated -- Kbdank71 15:35, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
There is an incomplete and very sparsely populated group of categories for American professional wrestlers by state. They appear to have been created in response to concern about the size of the parent category. This was previously marked with the "verylarge" template, which states that articles should all be moved from the parent category to the subcategory. This is highly undesirable as state affinities are of little relevance to professional wrestling and subcategorisation hinders access to the articles. I probably create more subcategories than any other user, but I still feel that there are some categories for which useful subcategorisation is not possible. If such categories get very large, that's just something we have to live with.
Merge all into Category:American professional wrestlers CalJW 14:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 15:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Redundant and empty category - proper category is Category:Unaccredited institutions of higher learning. Willmcw 07:15, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep -- Kbdank71 15:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
This category is inherently POV. The term "born-again Christians" is subjective, the interpretation varies among churches and between specific individuals. I don't believe a concrete definition could be made or agreed upon. I vote delete. Foofy 06:35, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete, empty -- Kbdank71 15:30, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Duplicate category CG janitor 05:11, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep -- Kbdank71 15:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
All of these together encompass 4 articles on cruisers, which realistically only need one category. Joshbaumgartner 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus -- Kbdank71 15:28, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Per previous CfDs, exchange country adjective with noun. Joshbaumgartner 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep -- Kbdank71 15:26, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Not enough articles to warrant sub-categorization. Joshbaumgartner 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was no consensus -- Kbdank71 15:24, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Excess extra categories to get to one article. New category in line with previous CfD discussion regarding Category:Naval ships of China. Joshbaumgartner 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge as nominated -- Kbdank71 15:21, 29 November 2005 (UTC) reply
Seperate category tree for classes not needed, and is not used for most country's, including big ones. Submarines category is sufficient for articles on both individual submarines and submarine classes. Joshbaumgartner 04:58, 21 November 2005 (UTC) reply