The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was renameall (except China). - TexasAndroid 19:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

This proposal is to establish "in country" as the naming convention for sub-categories of Category:Public holidays by country. Currently sub-cats of this category have no naming convention guideline, and namings used in practice include "in country" (used in the name of 7 of 14 sub-cats), "of country" (used in the name of 6 of 14 sub-cats), and "Fooian holidays" (used in the name of 1 of 14 sub-cats). However, nearly all of the 94 articles in Category:Public holidays by country that are not further sub-categorized use "in country". In the interests of standardization, the following renamings are proposed to match the naming convention used by the overwhelming majority of existing public holiday by country articles:

• Category:Chinese holidays to Category:Holidays in China
• Category:Public holidays of Fiji to Category:Public holidays in Fiji
• Category:Public holidays of Iran to Category:Public holidays in Iran
• Category:Holidays of Malta to Category:Holidays in Malta
• Category:Holidays of the Philippines to Category:Holidays in the Philippines
• Category:Holidays of the United States to Category:Holidays in the United States
• Category:Holidays of Wales to Category:Holidays in Wales

Please note that the choice of "holidays" versues "public holidays" is not addressed here, and it may be wise to revisit the point in a subsequent cfru. -- Kurieeto 23:14, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Rename all per nom. Golfcam 01:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Rename all per nom. mattbr³⁰ 11:32, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Rename all per nom. Hawkestone 17:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Rename all per nom. David Kernow 20:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Rename all per nom. Her Pegship 20:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Rename all except category:Chinese holidays. The content are holidays and festivals in Chinese culture. Not all of them are public holidays in China. — Insta ntnood 17:28, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Comment Agreed, sorry, I should have noticed that. I've moved Category:Chinese holidays from Category:Public holidays by country to Category:Holidays. What do you think about Category:Vietnamese holidays? It has three articles, one describes public holidays/"other holidays", and two others are for public holidays. Kurieeto 21:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was merge. - TexasAndroid 19:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Merge as the categories are similar and the latter category is more comprehensive. McPhail 22:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. Golfcam 01:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge per nom. mattbr³⁰ 11:36, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge per nom, or at least correct capitalization in former. David Kernow 20:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Delete This category duplicates Category:European Union law. Caveat lector 22:43, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete/merge per nom. mattbr³⁰ 11:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was rename to Category:Professional wrestling referees. - TexasAndroid 19:45, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

"Refs" is an unsuitably informal abbreviation. McPhail 22:27, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Rename per nom, but does the distinction need to be made from Category:Professional wrestling referees? mattbr³⁰ 11:41, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge to Category:Professional wrestling referees. With only 2 entries for a league that expired 16 years ago, I'm not sure a subcat is really needed. Vegaswikian 18:41, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge to Category:Professional wrestling referees per Vegaswikian. David Kernow 20:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge to Category:Professional wrestling referees. Chicheley 17:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was rename. - TexasAndroid 19:45, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

To follow parent Category:Executed people. David Kernow 22:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Rename as nom. David Kernow 22:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Rename per nom. mattbr³⁰ 11:42, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Rename per nom. Choalbaton 23:27, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Delete - Empty category since Sept. 2005. Also appears to be superceded by Category:Space exploration timelines. MakeRocketGoNow 21:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Besides it's not capitalized correctly. -- JeffW 23:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. mattbr³⁰ 11:45, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom and JeffW. David Kernow 20:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. Her Pegship 20:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was merge. - TexasAndroid 19:46, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Granularity issues here - only one listed so far, and unlikely to grow in the near future. The convention for the 1600s has been to go by decade, which has itself been a little patchy, with some decades having multiple bridges listed and others having none - individual years may be a stretch too far! TheGrappler 21:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. mattbr³⁰ 11:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge per nom. (A bridge too far?) David Kernow 20:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. - TexasAndroid 20:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The following Category:People by city subcategories should be renamed for consistency with other "people by" categories, including other Category:People by city subcategories.

• Category:People by Belgian city → Category:Belgian people by city
• Category:People by British city → Category:British people by city
• Category:People by Bulgarian city or town → Category:Bulgarian people by city or town
• Category:People by Canadian city → Category:Canadian people by city
• Category:People by Chinese city → Category:Chinese people by city
• Category:People by Czech city or town → Category:Czech people by city
• Category:People by Egyptian city → Category:Egyptian people by city
• Category:People by English city → Category:English people by city
• Category:People by French city → Category:French people by city
• Category:People by Georgian city → Category:Georgian people by city
• Category:People by German city → Category:German people by city
• Category:People by Greek city or town → Category:Greek people by city or town
• Category:People by Indian city → Category:Indian people by city
• Category:People by Irish city → Category:Irish people by city
• Category:People by Japanese city → Category:Japanese people by city
• Category:People by New Zealand city → Category:New Zealand people by city
• Category:People by Nigerian city → Category:Nigerian people by city
• Category:People by Northern Irish city → Category:Northern Irish people by city
• Category:People by Polish city → Category:Polish people by city
• Category:People by Russian city → Category:Russian people by city
• Category:People by South African city → Category:South African people by city
• Category:People by Spanish city → Category:Spanish people by city
• Category:People by Swedish city → Category:Swedish people by city
• Category:People by Uruguayan city → Category:Uruguayan people by city
• Category:People by Welsh city → Category:Welsh people by city

— Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

• Rename/Merge; per nom -- ProveIt ^(talk) 20:32, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep; IMHO the proposed form makes the category about the nationality of the person, not the city. If Madonna keeps a house in London; she's a person in a British city but not necessarily a British person in a city. Then we get into the business of Category:American people by British city...- choster 21:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Comment Do we really need to categorize people by city? What does it mean to be "of a city"? Do you need to be born there? Lived there how many years? When thinking about the biographies I've categorized, most of the time there isn't an obvious city to put them under. My usual practice is to stop at nationality and not even go down to the level of state, much less city. -- JeffW 23:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
  • Comment I on the other hand would rather list people by city of birth. Nationalities and states are fluid but cities survive them. User:Dimadick
    • But that isn't what is done. The categories are used flexibly, which makes sense to me. Hawkestone 17:39, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep as per choster. Valiantis 14:30, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep as per choster. Hawkestone 17:39, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep as per choster. Choalbaton 23:28, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep as per User:Choster and reverse merge redirects. (i started up this set of pages and named them with it in mind that many people of a city are not necessarily of the nationality of that city) a few others such as Category:American people by city should be renamed Mayumashu 10:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep. But then will we need categories like category:British people in Chicago or category:Canadian people in Berlin, as subcategories of category:British people by city and category:Canadian people by city? — Insta ntnood 17:37, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

blanked by creator -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. David Kernow 20:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Jean-Paul Gaultier models. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Wine critics. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Speedy delete (empty) per nom as also incorrectly capitalized. David Kernow 20:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

blanked by creator -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Speedy delete (empty) per nom as also incorrectly capitalized. David Kernow 21:03, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was reverse merge. - TexasAndroid 19:41, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Wikipedians who use Fl Studio. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep and merge Category:Wikipedians who use Fl Studio into this one, as the software is called FL Studio. mattbr³⁰ 11:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

nonsense -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete (empty). David Kernow 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Saddle Creek Records. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Saddle Creek Records. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:01, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

"Ryan Dickinson is one of the best people in North America. Everybody likes Ryan" -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete. Seems to be vanity, there is no article of the same name, and a search brings up a Myspace listing. mattbr³⁰ 12:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Speedy delete per mattbr³⁰. David Kernow 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. Alan Liefting 13:00, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Rugby union by country. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete/merge per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:05, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Singaporean violinists (plural). -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete/merge per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:06, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Speedy delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:RCD Mallorca managers. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge/delete per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was reverse merge. - TexasAndroid 19:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:50,000 passing yard club (plural). -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge both into Category:American football players with 50,000 passing yards. Failing that, then merge Category:50,000 passing yard club into Category:50,000 passing yards club. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:30, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge category:50,000 passing yard club into category:50,000 passing yards club, as Doug Bell's last suggestion.-- Mike Selinker 19:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See Category:Rail transport in Northern Ireland. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete/merge per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:11, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Speedy delete (empty) per nom as also incorrectly capitalized. David Kernow 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 02:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Fictional Americans in Marvel Comics -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete/merge per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:12, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:United League Baseball. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge/delete per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Andalusian people. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge/delete per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:14, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was merge to Category:Madrilenian people. - TexasAndroid 19:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:People from Madrid.

See: Category:Madrilenian people. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge to Category:Madrilenian people per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge to Category:Madrilenian people. mattbr³⁰ 12:16, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Navarrese people -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge/delete per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:16, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:H&M models -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge/delete per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Blanked by creator -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete as per Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#Category:Ectopistes. mattbr³⁰ 12:45, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. David Kernow 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Colchester United F.C. managers -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Blanked by creator -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• That was me. Dump it. I accidentally created this category (as well as Category:Conuropsis, Category:Ophrysia, you get the drift: extinct monotypic bird genera) accidentially. Monotypic genera (at least) should go directly to the family page. Dysmorodrepanis
• Speedy delete per creator. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. mattbr³⁰ 12:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per all above. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Abandoned -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Speedy delete (empty) per nom as also incorrectly capitalized. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was reverse merge for consistency. - TexasAndroid 19:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:CD Tenerife footballers -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep and merge Category:CD Tenerife footballers to here instead, as per most of this group of categories (see Footballers by club). — sjorford ++ 15:38, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Uruguayan culture -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Geography of Jharkhand (spelling/typo) -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Speedy delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Blanked by CovenantD -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Restaurants in the Midwest -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Speedy delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Restaurants in Missouri -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

I suspect this was actually a case of a relatively new editor misunderstanding how to format and structure a category. Delete, but probably speedyable; I don't think it needs to be debated. Bearcat 22:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Speedy delete per nom. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Restaurants in Missouri -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

I suspect this was actually a case of a relatively new editor misunderstanding how to format and structure a category. Delete, but probably speedyable; I don't think it needs to be debated. Bearcat 22:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Speedy delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Restaurants in San Clemente (caps) -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge per nom. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Speedy delete (empty) per nom. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. Alan Liefting 13:01, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Blanked by creator -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

See: Category:Mount Holyoke College alumnae -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was merge. - TexasAndroid 19:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

More accurate. Her Pegship 12:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC). reply

• Rename per nom. David Kernow 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
  • Done; will someone please delete the old category? Her Pegship 21:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was merge. - TexasAndroid 19:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

As I understand the article Auk, "Auks" is just a common name for Alcidae. If so, the categories should be merged. Conscious 12:37, 3 May 2006 (UTC). reply

Is that British usage? I don't think American birders or ornithologists would refer to puffins, guillemots, murres (an American word), or even auklets as auks. Maybe the article needs revision.

The only difference between the categories seems to be that "Alcidae" contains the extinct Mancallinae. My preference would be to rename "Auks" as "Alcinae" (if that's the right subfamily name), since I don't think there's a common name for all these birds in American English any more than there is for Icteridae or Cardinalidae, but I could live with merging the categories and calling the merged version "auks" if the British do that. — JerryFriedman 17:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Ditto Auks -> Alcinae. There is a nascent category system using taxonomic names only, and an incomplete older one using vernacular names, which are of course not mutually exclusive: Sometimes, e.g. for eagles (which are not a holophyletic assemblage but part of Buteoninae) this is good and makes perfect sense. In other cases, e.g. here, it is redundant. So Category:Auks should be Category:Alcinae with "Auk" as reference page (as it already is. Strictly, the page is about Alcidae, but there is no page for Alcinae). I hope I can soon find time to review my Mancalla literature and add some more articles on these funny critters. They were certainly distinct and peculiar birds worthy of note, one of these ersatz penguin taxa like Chendytes or the plotopterids, and the last species was probably killed off by humans, and the fossil record is very good. To simply drop them away with a footnote would have to be reversed anyway when there's more on these guys in WP. I think I could probably scrape together a stub on Mancallinae or Mancalla at a day's notice so we have category reference pages, but fossil species are not high on my priority list (I prefer to have somebody build subs and then flesh them out, taxobox them etc).

In vernacular language, there has always been a distinction between the different types of Alcidae (or Alcinae). "Murrelets" are American, as they are N Pacific birds. To an Englishman too, an "auk" is Alca torda only. "Auks" is a vernacular name mainly used by scientists who don't want to say "Alcidae/-inae". However, the vernacular categories (guillemots, puffins etc) should tie in in the Alcinae category, or possibly in Alcidae.

re "Maybe the article needs revision" - as said above, "Auk" is the vernacular scientific name for all alcid birds. Ornithologists would certainly use it in casual conservation (though they probably prefer "alcid"); birders probably won't (there's no point in saying you saw an unspecified species of alcid when the different types are readily recognizable in the field). At any rate, the taxonomic names redirect there. It's just as "parrot" would mean a mid-sized short-tailed psittacine, but "Parrots" includes macaws etc. Laypersons certainly won't use "Auks"; to them, there is only that one species (and the Giant Auk) to which such a name refers, and even that would probably be termed "razorbill". Cf. the name of the journal, "The Auk" (like "The Condor", but unlike "Cotinga", "Ardea" and whatnot). Dysmorodrepanis 18:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Auks is a term quite commonly used as a term for the family by birders in the UK - eg "thousands of auks passing Flamborough Head" or when a Razorbill/Guillemot is too distant to identify to species (as with "comic tern".) jimfbleak 09:12, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Or "Dammond's flycatcher". But do "thousands of auks" include puffins?

Anyway, I believe you guys if you say so, but I think it's a lot less common on these shores. Sibley, for instance, uses "alcids". But then what do I know? Alcidae are fairly rare in New Mexico. — JerryFriedman 17:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Move to different venue. - TexasAndroid 20:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

moved to WP:SFD. BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 01:29, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was rename. - TexasAndroid 19:55, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Rename to follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians/Categorization and be consistent with categories for other genres ( Category:Pop singers, Category:Soul singers, Category:Country singers, etc) -- Musicpvm 08:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Rename per nom. Osomec 17:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Rename per nom. Will you also be renaming Category:Vocalists, Category:Vocalists by style, and Category:Vocalists by instrument? -- JeffW 18:41, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Rename as indicated, as long as the other "vocalist" categories (e.g., the ones mentioned above) are also renamed accordingly, and if it doesn't conflict with existing guidelines in other project (besides WikiProject Musicians), for instance in WikiProject Music. B. Mearns ^*, KSC 13:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Rename The others should be nominated too, but it doesn't matter that they haven't been yet, this should go ahead anyway. Sumahoy 01:54, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. - TexasAndroid 20:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete. This category is ridiculously specific and will never have more than a couple of members. Mg e kelly 07:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep -- makes no sense to merge them with other towns and cities in Colorado, and keeps them in the same form as the other 28 similar categories for tother states. -- William Allen Simpson 08:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep. The category and its siblings increase the browsability of Category:Fictional towns and cities in the United States. × Meegs 09:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

OK, I wasn't aware that this was part of a general pattern. I'd be willing to drop this CfD in light of these facts. mg e kelly 09:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Keep. I made these categories after finding a few of the cities actually in the real cities categories for their states. So it made sense to have a scheme that connected them to the real categories and cleaned out the overcrowded Category:Fictional towns and cities category. (As a personal pet peeve, can we eliminate words like "ridiculously" from our nominations? Too often we discover reasons that make things not so ridiculous. I'm guilty of this too. It's just an etiquette thing.)-- Mike Selinker 14:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was rename. - TexasAndroid 19:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Category:Philadelphia Topics to Category:Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Category:Sports in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to Category:Sports in Philadelphia

• Delete, redundant. -- Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:14, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Comment correctly refactored as multiple. -- William Allen Simpson 09:01, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Speedy Delete all -- now empty, Category:Sports in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania possible recreation of previously deleted content -- William Allen Simpson 09:01, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge per nom. Osomec 17:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. - TexasAndroid 20:11, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Category:Galician Mexicans
• Category:Catalonian Mexicans
• Category:Castilian Mexicans
• Category:Asturian Mexicans

Delete Unneeded, There's no need to be this specific about origin, especially with regions. The Category:Spanish Mexicans is enough. It's like having categories such as " Midi-Pyrénées- Canadians".... --- Lancini87 05:05, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Keep these are certainly not analagous to modern French regions: these are historic nations and countries that existed long before the invention of "Spain", and continue to be just as, often more, widely-used definitions of nationality as "Spanish". -- Mais oui! 07:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Delete - ludicrously specific. Mg e kelly 07:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Keep in agreement with Mais Oui. Mayumashu 13:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Keep Equivalent to Category:Welsh-Americans or Category:Scottish-Americans. -- JeffW 17:40, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete Modern Spain came into existence before Mexico. Osomec 17:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Mais Oui is correct in that these are historic "nations". However, they had all been absorbed into the Kingdom of Spain by the time Spain settled Mexico. If someone can provide convincing evidence that modern-day Mexicans regularly delineate between their countrymen who had (increasingly distant) ancestors from Galicia and those who had (increasingly distant) ancestors from Catalonia, then I will look at my vote again. I note there is no evidence that this distinction is recognised in Mexico#Demographics. Valiantis 17:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per Valiantis Golfcam 01:44, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per Valiantis Hawkestone 17:40, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete. These ethnic categorizations are certainly not to the glory of Wikipedia. Let's hope this encyclopedia doesn't become a hate-monger. Lapaz 02:03, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete but Lapaz's point doesn't make much sense as these differences are played up by liberals. Choalbaton 23:29, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was rename. - TexasAndroid 19:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Consistency with other categories in Category:Parks in Australia. cj | talk 05:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC). reply

• Rename as per convention. mattbr³⁰ 13:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Rename per nom. David Kernow 21:03, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep, as category is now on only talk or project pages. - TexasAndroid 20:17, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Categorising articles by WikiProject is self reference. Many of the articles included have category clutter problems. Delete. CalJW 04:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC). reply

The problem is that these articles have been categorized on the article page - this should have been done on the talk page, and the category "isolated" from the content-space categories. So long as this is done, there is no need for the category to be deleted, so keep provided that the category tags are transferred to the talk pages. TheGrappler 20:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete Unless the tags are moved before the vote is closed. Golfcam 01:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete Unless the tags are moved before the vote is closed. Hawkestone 17:41, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete Unless the tags are moved before the vote is closed. Choalbaton 23:30, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Keep/comment: I have removed the category from articles, and added it to Template:Musician, which appears on talk pages. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 19:34, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (empty) -- William Allen Simpson 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Empty category. I created a new category in line with other similar categories in Category:Films by language. -- Yuje 03:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Delete This should have a gone a couple of weeks ago but a poor bit of listing on this page (mea culpa) left it unclear what the rename should be. Valiantis
• Delete per nom. Hawkestone 17:43, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. - TexasAndroid 20:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Per naming conventions, lower caps and use of "film" instead of "movie". Her Pegship 03:04, 3 May 2006 (UTC). reply

• Support rename, but with one entry, do we really need it? The JPS ^{talk to me} 14:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete Contains one item and not a very convincing one at that. "Anti-X" is simplistic and rather insulting to a film if it is at all sophisticated. Osomec 17:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete Especially as the one film in question is the Hollywood film The Bells of St. Mary's. I'm not aware that anyone has previously suggested that RKO was out to smash the system! Valiantis 17:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delete per Osomec. I think an anti-X films categories need to be very selective to avoid over-categorizing. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was merge to Category:Anti-war films. - TexasAndroid 19:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Per naming conventions, lower caps and use of "film" instead of "movie". Her Pegship 03:01, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Merge into Category:Anti-war films Osomec 17:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge into Category:Anti-war films Valiantis 17:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge per Osomec and Valiantis. — Doug Bell  ^{talk• contrib} 19:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge per all above. David Kernow 21:03, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge to Category:Anti-war films. GilliamJF 22:04, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was rename both. - TexasAndroid 19:59, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The proper spelling of "Butt-head" includes a hyphen. tregoweth 02:45, 3 May 2006 (UTC). reply

• Support. I'm also adding Category:Beavis and Butthead characters → Category:Beavis and Butt-head characters to the proposal. × Meegs 09:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: a google search shows many reliable sources that capitalize Head, including MTV and IMDB. × Meegs 09:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was merge to category:Toy weapons. - TexasAndroid 20:14, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

even a "Water gun" cat would not contain 10 articles as is. Circeus 02:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Question: Do we anywhere near 10 articles for a water gun category? If so, I'd like to have one, but I can only find Squirt gun, Super Soaker, and CPS 2000. It doesn't seem to be a growth area either, so if that's it, I'm leaning towards merging this cat's one member to Category:Toys. × Meegs 12:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Merge into Category:Toys. Golfcam 01:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• I think this catagory has room to expand as there are so many super soakers to be reviewed, and then theres the rival companys soakers as well.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.25.160 ( talk • contribs)

I suggest letting this category be deleted, and creating a single category for all water guns once a few more articles have been created. × Meegs 09:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply

• Move per Meegs to Category:Toy water guns, a subcategory of Category:Toys. David Kernow 15:15, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
• Move per David Kernow, or maybe even better, category:Toy weapons to match the Toy weapon article. "Toys" deserves more subcategorization.-- Mike Selinker 14:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.