The result of the debate was move.
Rename to correct Wikipedia category name: Category:Wikipedia:Suspected sockpuppets of 67.129.121.254. -- ADNghiem501 02:41, 19 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:38, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
For some reason I missed this one out of the listing when it was recently agreed to rename all the European transport(ation) in categories to "transport". Rename Category:Transport in Slovenia. CalJW 23:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was Moved to SFD - TexasAndroid 19:45, 19 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge. Syrthiss 13:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Merge. Created on 26 March as a supercategory. Result has been to remove Category:Scottish newspapers and Category:Northern Irish newspapers from the main Category:British newspapers; and to remove cat:British newspapers from its original spots in Category:European newspapers, Category:Newspapers by country, Category:Media of the United Kingdom and Category:British culture. It is hard to see what other purpose it serves. (While we are here, why are these categories all called "Fooian newspapers" instead of "Newspapers of foo", which appears to be the standard for inanimate objects?) Mais oui! 21:07, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Syrthiss 13:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
fix abbreviation and capitalization. Paul 21:57, 17 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete for now. Syrthiss 13:41, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
I created category:National Hunt racehorses without realising category:Jumping racehorses existed. Both titles mean exactly the same thing, but I think the new title is more 'correct'. If I'd have known it existed I'd have suggested renaming it. Zafonic 20:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename all. Syrthiss 13:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Some time ago I successfully nominated category:American literary biographers for merging into category:American biographers because it was based on a user's point of view as to which biographers were of literary merit (it was not restricted to biographers of writers, which would not have been desirable in any case as many biographers have written biographies of both writers and others). I have now realised that it was part of a set, all created by a user who is currently banned from Wikipedia for twelve months. "Celebrity biographer" is the other side of his point of view, the place where he put what he considered to be trash. But nearly all published biographies are about celebrities in a broad sense. The distinction is imprecise, it is not helpful for accessing articles and that is little or no sign that it has been taken up by other users.
Survey:
The result of the debate was dark delete. Syrthiss 13:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
No articles in category except from user area. Thorpe | talk 15:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
There is no "wikiproject United States." It is an organizational category for centralizing work on all the United States-related WikiProjects. — Markles 15:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
This category needs to be more clearly distinguished from category:Religion in Greece. The lead article is called Ancient Greek religion. Rename CalJW 14:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
"Buildings and structures" is the standard form. It should not be "in Ancient Greece" because Ancient Greece was not a state and the boundaries of the Ancient Greek world were far from fixed. This category is for the buildings and structures erected by the civilisation, wherever they happened to be. Rename CalJW 14:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was already deleted - TexasAndroid 15:43, 20 April 2006 (UTC) reply
All contents have been moved to Category:FIFA World Cup following the renaming of Football World Cup article to FIFA World Cup. Conscious 13:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Syrthiss 13:45, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
This category is redundant. All the articles listed (and many more) are also present in Category:Scientific misconduct. Cpt. Morgan 08:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge that one article. Syrthiss 13:48, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Doesn't need an entire category for non-notable buildings. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Ardenn 04:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
This category isn't about law (i.e., legislation), but about rules of order for conducting parliamentary proceedings. The term "parliamentary procedure" gets ten times the number of Google hits as "parliamentary law". — Psychonaut 03:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename to Naval batles of Italy. Syrthiss 13:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Standard naming for categories of battles by participant. Alternately, merge to Category:Battles of Italy as the split isn't really needed at this point. Kirill Lok s h in 03:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Syrthiss 13:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Empty. There might be some river craft that could qualify, but I can't find any such articles. Austro-Hungarian ships are covered by Category:Ships of Austria-Hungary. Josh 02:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
These two categories cover the same ground, but I'm not sure which would be a better name. Another option is Category:Pharmacologic agent logos (cf. Category:Pharmacologic agents). They probably mean subtly different things in medic-speak.
Note that Category:Drug logos used to be subcategorised under Category:Company logos - I moved it out just before CfM tagging. A drug is certainly not a company! There's a lot of activity in Category:Logos at the moment, so things are still somewhat in flux. SeventyThree( Talk) 02:04, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Syrthiss 13:59, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a category of unclear usefulness, little apparent encyclopedic value, and a monstrous namespace. — thames 01:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
{{
cite book}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help) p. 187
The result of the debate was merge. Syrthiss 13:59, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Suggest merger: the article descriptions appear to suggest they are the same (I will add merge tags to the articles, too). Stephenb (Talk) 13:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was move.
Rename to correct Wikipedia category name: Category:Wikipedia:Suspected sockpuppets of 67.129.121.254. -- ADNghiem501 02:41, 19 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:38, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
For some reason I missed this one out of the listing when it was recently agreed to rename all the European transport(ation) in categories to "transport". Rename Category:Transport in Slovenia. CalJW 23:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was Moved to SFD - TexasAndroid 19:45, 19 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge. Syrthiss 13:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Merge. Created on 26 March as a supercategory. Result has been to remove Category:Scottish newspapers and Category:Northern Irish newspapers from the main Category:British newspapers; and to remove cat:British newspapers from its original spots in Category:European newspapers, Category:Newspapers by country, Category:Media of the United Kingdom and Category:British culture. It is hard to see what other purpose it serves. (While we are here, why are these categories all called "Fooian newspapers" instead of "Newspapers of foo", which appears to be the standard for inanimate objects?) Mais oui! 21:07, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Syrthiss 13:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
fix abbreviation and capitalization. Paul 21:57, 17 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete for now. Syrthiss 13:41, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
I created category:National Hunt racehorses without realising category:Jumping racehorses existed. Both titles mean exactly the same thing, but I think the new title is more 'correct'. If I'd have known it existed I'd have suggested renaming it. Zafonic 20:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename all. Syrthiss 13:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Some time ago I successfully nominated category:American literary biographers for merging into category:American biographers because it was based on a user's point of view as to which biographers were of literary merit (it was not restricted to biographers of writers, which would not have been desirable in any case as many biographers have written biographies of both writers and others). I have now realised that it was part of a set, all created by a user who is currently banned from Wikipedia for twelve months. "Celebrity biographer" is the other side of his point of view, the place where he put what he considered to be trash. But nearly all published biographies are about celebrities in a broad sense. The distinction is imprecise, it is not helpful for accessing articles and that is little or no sign that it has been taken up by other users.
Survey:
The result of the debate was dark delete. Syrthiss 13:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
No articles in category except from user area. Thorpe | talk 15:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
There is no "wikiproject United States." It is an organizational category for centralizing work on all the United States-related WikiProjects. — Markles 15:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
This category needs to be more clearly distinguished from category:Religion in Greece. The lead article is called Ancient Greek religion. Rename CalJW 14:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
"Buildings and structures" is the standard form. It should not be "in Ancient Greece" because Ancient Greece was not a state and the boundaries of the Ancient Greek world were far from fixed. This category is for the buildings and structures erected by the civilisation, wherever they happened to be. Rename CalJW 14:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was already deleted - TexasAndroid 15:43, 20 April 2006 (UTC) reply
All contents have been moved to Category:FIFA World Cup following the renaming of Football World Cup article to FIFA World Cup. Conscious 13:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Syrthiss 13:45, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
This category is redundant. All the articles listed (and many more) are also present in Category:Scientific misconduct. Cpt. Morgan 08:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge that one article. Syrthiss 13:48, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Doesn't need an entire category for non-notable buildings. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Ardenn 04:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
This category isn't about law (i.e., legislation), but about rules of order for conducting parliamentary proceedings. The term "parliamentary procedure" gets ten times the number of Google hits as "parliamentary law". — Psychonaut 03:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename to Naval batles of Italy. Syrthiss 13:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Standard naming for categories of battles by participant. Alternately, merge to Category:Battles of Italy as the split isn't really needed at this point. Kirill Lok s h in 03:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Syrthiss 13:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Empty. There might be some river craft that could qualify, but I can't find any such articles. Austro-Hungarian ships are covered by Category:Ships of Austria-Hungary. Josh 02:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Syrthiss 13:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
These two categories cover the same ground, but I'm not sure which would be a better name. Another option is Category:Pharmacologic agent logos (cf. Category:Pharmacologic agents). They probably mean subtly different things in medic-speak.
Note that Category:Drug logos used to be subcategorised under Category:Company logos - I moved it out just before CfM tagging. A drug is certainly not a company! There's a lot of activity in Category:Logos at the moment, so things are still somewhat in flux. SeventyThree( Talk) 02:04, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Syrthiss 13:59, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
This is a category of unclear usefulness, little apparent encyclopedic value, and a monstrous namespace. — thames 01:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply
{{
cite book}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help) p. 187
The result of the debate was merge. Syrthiss 13:59, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
Suggest merger: the article descriptions appear to suggest they are the same (I will add merge tags to the articles, too). Stephenb (Talk) 13:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply