The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was keep. Kbdank71 13:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:People involved in the Soviet war in Afghanistan ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Rename to Category:People of the Soviet-Afghan War, convention of Category:People by war. -- Prove It ^(talk) 23:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Rename, shortened name is better. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Oppose. The convention of Category:People by war actually appears to be "People of [main article name]", and in this case the main article is Soviet war in Afghanistan. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 01:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC) reply
  • ... and the parent category is Category:Soviet war in Afghanistan. The main article and the two categories should follow the same format. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 04:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Note: cfdnotice placed at Soviet war in Afghanistan. --08:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrownHairedGirl ( talk • contribs)
• Oppose. The name "Soviet war in Afghanistan" is considered the most NPOV version. Using another name would just invite more controversy, not worth it just to shorten the category name. -- Raoulduke47 12:35, 26 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 13:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:African footballers in Turkey ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Over-categorisation. Dudesleeper · Talk 21:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related deletions. Dudesleeper · Talk 21:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Delete - per nom. Sebisthlm 01:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete, per nom. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:56, 21 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename all. Kbdank71 13:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Nominator's rationale:Rename them all to include the words "musical groups" at the end of the category name, as per Category:American black metal musical groups. Note that some albums are included in these sub-cats, when it's band specific. Lugnuts 18:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Given that, as you say, some albums are included, it's not really accurate to describe the categories as "X black metal musical groups". Either rename all - and the American one - to Category:Fooian black metal music or rename as above and move the albums to more appropriate categories. Grutness... wha? 22:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Yep, or compare the sub-cats in Category:Death metal musical groups for what I think these sub-cats should be worded as. Lugnuts 09:29, 21 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete, no opposition. Kbdank71 13:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:Accessories awards ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete without prejudice because it is unnecessarily specific at this point. Currently there is one entry in "Accessories awards", and that article is also categorized in the parent category, "Fashion awards", which has only 12 articles and need not be split at this point. lquilter 16:53, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Note, since nobody is picking up on this maybe there's some confusion. This category is dealing with fashion accessories. So it could easily be upmerged into parent category Fashion awards. -- lquilter 17:32, 25 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename. Kbdank71 13:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Propose renaming Category:Geology prizes to Category:Geology awards

Nominator's rationale: Rename - Almost all other science awards are in form of "Subject awards", and not all geology awards are prizes per se. (Some are medals, some lectures, some honorary titles, etc.) lquilter 16:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Rename, per nom. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 18:00, 21 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename. Kbdank71 13:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Propose renaming Category:Skeleton to Category:Skeleton racing

Nominator's rationale: Rename to distinguish from anatomical category. Alternatively, rename to Category:Skeleton (sport). Her Pegship (tis herself) 16:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Rename per nom, and to avoid confusion. -- Prove It ^(talk) 13:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Rename per nom; either choice makes sense. -- lquilter 17:28, 25 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename. Kbdank71 13:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Propose renaming Category:Economics prizes, medals, and awards to Category:Economics awards

Nominator's rationale: Rename, Propose renaming "Economics prizes, medals, and awards" in keeping with the vast majority of other subject-based awards in "Subject awards" format. This is also in keeping with earlier discussions that consolidated Category:Prizes into Category:Awards, choosing "awards" as the broader and more generic term for all of those synonymous recognitions. (Either or both medals or prizes often accompany awards, as well as honorary lectures, etc.) lquilter 16:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Rename per nom. // Fra nkB 04:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Rename per nomination. The shorter name is better. EdJohnston 05:03, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Rename, the current name is too long. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:55, 21 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 13:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:Mighty Max ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete - small category with no growth potential also eponymous overcategorization. Otto4711 15:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom & ample precedent. Carlossuarez46 02:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete, per nom. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:56, 21 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 13:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:My Gym Partner's a Monkey ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete - eponymous overcategorization for a series. Material doesn't warrant the category. Otto4711 14:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Delete – I don't even remember creating it. Wierd. Marasmusine 20:45, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom & ample precedent. Carlossuarez46 02:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete, per nom. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:56, 21 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 13:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:Wonder Pets ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete - eponymous overcategorization for a TV show. Not warranted for the show article and a random character article. Otto4711 14:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom & ample precedent. Carlossuarez46 02:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete, per nom. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:55, 21 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 13:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:The X's ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete - category not needed for just the show article. Otto4711 14:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom & ample precedent. Carlossuarez46 02:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete, per nom. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:54, 21 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename. Kbdank71 13:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:Jacksonville, Florida neighborhoods ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Rename to Category:Neighborhoods in Jacksonville, Florida, convention of Category:Neighborhoods in Florida. -- Prove It ^(talk) 13:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Rename per nom. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Rename per nom. // Fra nkB 04:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Rename, per nom. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:57, 21 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 13:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:Guests on The Colbert Report ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Non-defining category and performer by performance. lquilter 11:50, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Delete, we don't do Talk show guests, nor Guest stars categories, see also many previous discussions. -- Prove It ^(talk) 13:06, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_June_13#Category:Celebrities_who_have_appeared_on_the_Simpsons
• Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_August_24#Category:Friends_.28TV_series.29_guest_stars
• Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_18#Category:Saturday_Night_Live_musical_guests
• Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_November_20#Category:Saturday_Night_Live_hosts
• Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_October_21#Category:The_Simpsons_Guest_stars
• Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_November_21#Category:The_O.C._guest_stars
• Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_December_25#Category:The_Simpsons_guest_stars
• Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_January_28#Category:Guests_on_Koffee_with_Anu
• Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_February_17#Category:The_Simpsons_guest_cast_members
• Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_8#Category:The_Daily_Show_guests
• Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_July_22#Category:Monk_.28TV_series.29_guest_stars

• Delete per nom. older ≠ wiser 15:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom as non-defining. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete performer by performance as non-defining per many precedents. Doczilla 21:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete, per nom. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:53, 21 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was relisted on oct 26. Kbdank71 13:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:Later punk groups ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Subjective classification - how exactly is this defined? What is later, or indeed earlier for that matter? Lugnuts 10:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Comment - There is Category:Early punk groups which defines as "formed in the 1970s or earlier". Certainly there's informal use of these terms in conversation, but I'm not sure what the best way to split up the otherwise very large Category:Punk rock groups would be. Maybe by decade of formation? -- lquilter 17:30, 25 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 13:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:Vaníček analysis ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: No reason to have a category named for one COI editor's variant name for his advisor's method. No pages in category since least-squares spectral analysis was fixed Dicklyon 06:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Delete. COI or not, it is unlikely that there will every be more than one article in this category. -- Zvika 10:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete. If it ever turns out that multiple articles are needed for this topic area, I wouldn't object to re-creation of the category. This should wait until such articles are written. EdJohnston 19:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete, per nom. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete per EdJohnston. No need to create an empty category. -- Bfigura ^{( talk)} 21:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Pavel Vozenilek 01:27, 25 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 13:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:America's Next Top Model participants ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: overcategorization. performer by performance. Number1spygirl 06:06, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Doczilla 07:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete, per nom. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Comment - we have in general treated participants in reality television series differently from actors in series. The reasoning behind de-categorizing actors by series is that they tended to include any actor who appeared in a single episode of any given series, leading to massive category clutter on prolific guests. In the case of reality TV series, though, the participant in the vast majority of cases is only going to have appeared in one such series. Otto4711 14:43, 22 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 13:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Category:Sports Illustrated swimsuit models ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: overcategorization Number1spygirl 12:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Comment (As category creator). No opinion, as this was an administrative renaming of Category:Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Model, originally created by User:Lil Flip246, I left them a talk page note. — xaosflux ^Talk 23:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Delete - performer by performance overcategorization. Otto4711 00:47, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete per above. Some version of this has been deleted before. Doczilla 07:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Listify and delete - This information should be kept available, but a list is adequate. Cgingold 12:27, 20 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Go list // Fra nkB 04:17, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply
• Delete per above. _{Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)} 17:52, 21 October 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.