The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 discussion was: rename. Though not mandated by consensus of this discussion, I'd agree with Peter's recommendation to change these categories to talk-page categories. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:28, 1 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Propose renaming Category:Anime (date of release unknown) to Category:Anime (year of release missing)

Propose renaming Category:Manga (date of release unknown) to Category:Manga (year of release missing)

Nominator's rationale: Rename I'm nominating these categories for renaming for two reasons: first, the word "date" should be changed to "year" since we actually don't have an exact date of release for many anime and manga series (though manga is more likely not to have an exact one), and these categories are not intended to cover these cases, but only those in which not even the year of release is known. Second, the word "unknown" should be changed to "missing", per the lead of the (current) parent category Category:Year of work unknown: "This category is for articles about works where the articles do not have a year of establishment because the year is not known and is never likely to be known (eg. historical works)." It is highly unlikely that any anime or manga series would resist all attempts to discover at least a year of release, since the media forms of manga and anime probably haven't been around for long enough for such information to have been completely lost or obscured beyond recovery. — Dino guy 1000 22:46, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• Fine by me. Support. ··· 日本穣 ^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 05:42, 28 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Support - nom's arguments convince me. — Quasirandom ( talk) 14:47, 29 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Support But if kept this should be a technical category to be placed on the talk page, since it is not categorising content but identifying defects in the article. Peterkingiron ( talk) 19:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 discussion was: Delete. Vegaswikian ( talk) 22:46, 2 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Category:Multiracial actors ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete Category:Multiracial musicians and Category:Multiracial people were deleted for verifiability issues and Overcategorization; this category is no different; also fails NONCATGRS Diverse Mentality 21:24, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• Delete per previous consensus to not use this means of classification. We need to weed out all of these "multiracial" categories. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 05:50, 28 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Delete People should be categorised according to their specific descent, and preferably only where that is a defining characteristic, not merely as "multiracial". Peterkingiron ( talk) 19:36, 29 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Delete Okay. Email/ User:Maersayer 11:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 discussion was: dele.... Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:23, 1 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Category:Casio digital watch detainees ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Delete - This category is the very embodiment of WP:OCAT: extremely narrow in definition and very little prospect of growth. It's really a gem of its sort; in fact, you could say it's named with the precision of a Casio watch. (No need to upmerge as the sole article is already well-categorized.) Notified creator with {{ subst:cfd-notify}} Cgingold ( talk) 21:09, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Delete - Per Nom. Dman727 ( talk) 21:55, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Comment – there are quite a few more yet to be captured by this fascinating category - see Casio F91W (an example of which is on my wrist). Occuli ( talk) 02:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• I suspect your little secret is probably safe from the prying eyes of Big Brother here in the sub-basement of Wikipedia. But to be safe, maybe we should scrub it just to be sure you don't get nabbed and vanish into thin air on New Year's Eve. Cgingold ( talk) 06:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• Too late .... no time to fini ...

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 discussion was: rename (no opposition). Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:49, 2 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Propose renaming Category:Philadelphia Athletics seasons to Category:Philadelphia Athletics (AA) seasons

Nominator's rationale: Match other similar categories for the team's managers and players. Also avoid confusion with other Philadelphia Athletics teams, most notably the team now known as the Oakland Athletics. Dewelar ( talk) 19:57, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 discussion was: rename. While there is consensus to rename, there is no consensus on what to rename to, even after relisting. As such, I'm going to take Vegas's suggestion and just rename to Category:Deaths by the Israel Defense Forces in order to expand the acronym. If it's desired to hash out whether this should contain civilian or military, all people or just non-Palestinians, either renominate this for further renaming or use a hatnote. Kbdank71 15:14, 8 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Category:Deaths by IDF ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete? I'm not sure if we categorize people by the military group that killed them, but any input on this topic is welcome. (If kept, obviously needs to be renamed, maybe to Category:People killed by the Israel Defense Forces.) Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:43, 15 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• I'd lean in favor of 'keeping it, though only if it includes all people, not just civilians, killed by the IDF. Obviously support a rename to Category:People killed by the Israel Defense Forces. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas.macmillan ( talk • contribs)
  • I would have thought it would make more sense to limit it to civilians killed by the IDF, since I can't imagine that the category would be defining for a military death in a war against Israel (see Alansohn's points below). But as Johnbod points out, civilian/military distinctions can be less than a brightline. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:16, 16 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Delete, unless an appropriate name can be reached by consensus As named, the category would include all military deaths in all wars fought by Israel since 1948, above and beyond other polemic issues raised by the category. This should be created on a broader basis to cover categories of similar deaths by all parties, if it should exist at all. Alansohn ( talk) 02:38, 16 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Rename but keep. This is clearly the most defining category for all these individuals, only one of whom would otherwise be notable. It therefore should be kept by WP:CAT. It seems very undercategorized. It could be expanded to cover all deaths, but I don't see this as necessary - the civilian/military distinction is not too clearcut here. See Category:People murdered in the Palestinian territories for a range of the other categories in this area. Johnbod ( talk) 02:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• Better yet, see Category:Human death in the Palestinian territories. Cgingold ( talk) 20:53, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• keep All of the people presently listed are civilians, and are not Palestinians or Israelis. The name or definition could be modified to reflect this. Pustelnik ( talk) 00:49, 17 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Rename if kept, or there is a no consensus decision, to Category:Deaths by the Israel Defense Forces to expand the acronym. Vegaswikian ( talk) 07:21, 20 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Rename The category appears to be Category:Non-Palestinian civilians killed by the Israel Defense Forces. It is clearly not intended for Palestinians killed by them during the Intefada nor for casualities of the Arab-Israeli wars. Category:People killed by the Israel Defense Forces could be a parent category. This one appears to be for peace campaigners who have been killed who trying to observe IDF or protect Palestinians from them by their presence. Peterkingiron ( talk) 20:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Fixed relist template. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Otto4711 ( talk) 15:42, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• Lots of deaths by IDF closed with untransparent investigations. But somehow a better name might be needed because this list only contains western people. Kasaalan ( talk) 22:41, 1 January 2009 (UTC) reply
• Rename to non-Palestinian victims of the IDF- notable non-Palestinian victims civilian or not should be included since they're not exactly targets of the IDF.-- 23prootie ( talk) 08:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 discussion was: merge 3 categories as nominated. Category:Nuclear power companies in the United States can be nominated separately for renaming to "of" standard. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:53, 2 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Suggest merging:

• Category:Nuclear power station owners and operators to Category:Nuclear power companies
• Category:Nuclear power station owners and operators in the United States to Category:Nuclear power companies in the United States
• Category:Nuclear power station operators in the United States to Category:Nuclear power companies in the United States

Propose renaming

• Category:Nuclear power companies in the United States to Category:Nuclear power companies of the United States

Nominator's rationale: Overlapping categories. All nuclear power station owners and operators are at the same time nuclear power companies and I can't imagine any nuclear power company, which is not owner or operator of the nuclear power station. Of course, there could be some theoretical cases, however, I don't see there could be any case in practice, which can't be solved without the Category:Nuclear power station owners and operators. Also, this category is not necessary for systematic categorization purposes. Beagel ( talk) 08:09, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Same principles applies also to subcategories Category:Nuclear power station owners and operators in the United States and Category:Nuclear power station operators in the United States. At the same time, Category:Nuclear power companies in the United States should be renamed Category:Nuclear power companies of the United States to follow the pattern of other company's categories. Beagel ( talk) 20:17, 28 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• Comment - I've added the sub-category in order to complete the job at one go, whatever the decision. I'm leaning toward supporting this proposal, but I'd like to hear from other editors first, including the creator. Notified creator with {{ subst:cfd-notify}} Cgingold ( talk) 13:02, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. Unfortunately the creator of this category is blocked indefinitely. Beagel ( talk) 13:28, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    • Ah, I didn't see that; having looked over his talk page, it's not entirely surprising. I guess I'll have to take up some of the slack myself and do a bit of "devil's advocacy". Cgingold ( talk) 13:59, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    • I've also solicited input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Energy. Cgingold ( talk) 14:10, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Question - What do you make of Category:Nuclear power station operators in the United States (also created by the same editor)? Cgingold ( talk) 14:21, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  • Owners and operators of nuclear power stations are not necessarily same companies, but in most of cases they are. Right now I don't see any practical reason to keep them separated and this seems like over-categorization. So, my proposal is to merge also Category:Nuclear power station operators in the United States to the Category:Nuclear power companies in the United States. At the same time I see that later category also consists of (some) nuclear engineering companies. Maybe we should create a categorization system for nuclear engineering companies (at least parent category, I am not sure about country-based categories) like Category:Nuclear engineering companies or Category:Nuclear technology companies which is a subcategory for Category:Engineering companies, Category:Nuclear power companies and Category:Nuclear technology? Beagel ( talk) 14:46, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Question: Should the Category:Nuclear power companies in the United States to be renamed Category:Nuclear power companies of the United States to follow the pattern of other power company categories? Beagel ( talk) 14:56, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 discussion was: delete. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:53, 2 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Category:Dexter's Laboratory characters ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete Only one item, and even it's on shaky ground. No hope of expansion. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 06:49, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• Delete. I agree with TenPoundHammer, this category has no chance of growing. Diverse Mentality 21:30, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 discussion was: Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Category:Civil Air Patrol Wing Commanders ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete Very few people who hold or have held this position are notable rogerd ( talk) 06:25, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• Delete. One person in the category, and it's a user. Definitely doesn't justify its existence. Diverse Mentality 21:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• Delete. I'm working to clean up several recently created categories so they can be deleted. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 11:14, 27 December 2008 (UTC) reply
• If there were contents, I'd say Listify, but it's empty, so isn't it speediable? 76.66.195.190 ( talk) 05:30, 28 December 2008 (UTC) reply

  It wasn't when it was listed, and according to criteria for speedy deletion, it must be empty for four days, which it hasn't yet. -- rogerd ( talk) 20:03, 28 December 2008 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an 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 discussion was: rename. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Propose renaming Category:Association football commentators to Category:Football (soccer) commentators

Nominator's rationale: the established wikipedia disambiguate is 'football (soccer)' Mayumashu ( talk) 04:25, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• Rename per nom & recent CFD discussion on super-category. Cgingold ( talk) 12:27, 26 December 2008 (UTC) reply

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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.