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 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.
Category:Cradel and Ijanderson977
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete - "This is a list of all userboxes created by User:Cradel and User:Ijanderson977." Not useful to categorize userboxes by who created them. Additionally, users are showing up in the categoy improperly. The name of the category also gives no clue as to its actual intended purpose until you read the description, and would set precedent for any 2-user combination category to be created if kept. Users can use the prefix index to find userboxes created by them.
VegaDark (
talk)
19:44, 28 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete - we don't categorize articles, images, or userpages by who wrote or uploaded them, and the same goes for userboxes too. Either keep a list, use "what links here" or the prefix index.
BencherliteTalk20:06, 28 June 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.
United States radio templates
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 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.
Northern Exposure
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete both - the cast subcat is improper performer by performanceovercategorization. The category for the series is eponymous overcategorization per hundreds of precedents and is also a small category with no growth potential. The show's article serves as an appropriate navigational hub.
Otto4711 (
talk)
17:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom; though maybe a speedy should be avoided due to the paucity of input in the former CfD, but I certainly wouldn't oppose a speedy delete.
Good Ol’factory(talk)02:11, 1 July 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.
Category:Walking with series
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete - main article
Walking with... serves as an appropriate navigational hub. There is also a complete template. No need for the eponymous category. If retained, it needs to be renamed because the current name is unclear.
Otto4711 (
talk)
16:56, 28 June 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.
Category:TVyNovelas Awards
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete - all of the subcats are going to be speedily deleted as a result of a previous CFD. The category is not needed to hold just the main article.
Otto4711 (
talk)
16:41, 28 June 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.
Category:Presidents of the American Bar Association
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.
Nominator's rationale:Discuss - a
previous CFR resulted in the renaming of this category from "Presidents of the ABA" but sentiment was expressed that the category be deleted as non-defining in favor of the list. It was suggested that the category be renamed and then nominated for deletion. The first part happened so here's part two. I don't have strong feelings either way.
Otto4711 (
talk)
16:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Keep One could argue that this was equivalent to categorisation by award (which we regularly delete and listify), but to be president of a major professional body is rather more than a trivial award. We have retained Nobel prize categories and certain other important award categories. I would suggest that this an important enough position for its retention. Note: I am English.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:21, 29 June 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.
Actively undergoing
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:keep. The categories are used to find forgotten {{inuse}} and {{underconstruction}} tagged pages. I am one of those people who forgets about them. Evidently we need a way to find these articles and links will not do. Renaming seems pointless when they are hidden, maintenance cats.
Angus McLellan(Talk)16:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Rename as nom: Not all of the pages in these categories are articles. In fact in the first category alone, most would fall into the "other" area, if this existed. For example, user pages, general Wikipedia pages, project pages, portals etc.
Simply south (
talk)
16:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment I also wonder about the value of these categories. I suppose it is to enable Admins to delete these tags if they have been there sometime without progress being made. However, if they are not useful, they should certainly be deleted.
Both are supposed to temporary, in place for a matter of hours & days respectively. If anyone watches the categories, they could be used to detect one forgotten about & left in place too long. But it might be a big if. Looking at some,
Facility condition assessment (major edit) had not changed in 4 days, so I removed the tag. Nearly all of the rest of these seem to be on user sub-pages, where it seems odd to use "in use" at all. Template George Best has not been edited since April (Rich Farnborough if you please).
Johnbod (
talk)
22:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Keep for now - See comment above - I'm loath to delete unless there is another way of tracking these templates, which seem often forgotten about.
Johnbod (
talk)
22:39, 29 June 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.
Category:Drafted Norwegians
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 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.
Category:Female American state legislators
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 to
Category:American women state legislators. There were several issues raised in the discussion. There was consensus for this rename. The other issues raised they did not produce a consensus. Those other points can be raised again in a new nomination.
Vegaswikian (
talk)
19:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)reply
This was a tricky one to name, as
Category:State legislators of the United States and
Category:American women in politics have conflicting naming conventions; the latter, in fact, doesn't have a clear convention at all, but instead has subcategories named in several different formats. As the creator, I have no preference as to the potential new title for this, except to note that it might be worth reviewing as to whether a consistent naming convention could possibly be applied to both parents. As well, the {{popcat}} template needs to be maintained on it at this time, as the category currently contains only a small minority of its total potential population.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)reply
I've given some thought to how & why the two naming conventions are applied, and my sense of things is that people feel that it just doesn't sound right to put "women" directly in front of "United States" -- whereas using it in other word-combinations doesn't seem to bother most people. I suppose it could just take some "getting used to". In any event, as much as it would in principle be nice to agree on a single all-encompassing naming convention, it may simply not be possible to do so.
Cgingold (
talk)
23:46, 30 June 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.
Category:Rhino albums
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.
Nominator's rationale:Merge, Looks like the category was created without realizing one already existed under a slightly different name.
Wolfer68 (
talk)
07:39, 28 June 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.
Category:Seoul Metropolitan Subway templates
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 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.
Category:Kowloon-Canton Railway templates
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 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.
Category:Split by month
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.
Possibly Rename -
Category:articles to be split by month. This might be a useful category for identifying articles nominated for splitting a long time ago, for which some final decision is needed. However, is there a bot that adds dates to "split" tags? If not, this category will be difficult to maintain and should be upmerged, and (perhaps) the monthly categories deleted too.
Category:Articles to be split currently contains rather over 200 items, making it rather too large to be convenient.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:15, 29 June 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 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.
Category:Cradel and Ijanderson977
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete - "This is a list of all userboxes created by User:Cradel and User:Ijanderson977." Not useful to categorize userboxes by who created them. Additionally, users are showing up in the categoy improperly. The name of the category also gives no clue as to its actual intended purpose until you read the description, and would set precedent for any 2-user combination category to be created if kept. Users can use the prefix index to find userboxes created by them.
VegaDark (
talk)
19:44, 28 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete - we don't categorize articles, images, or userpages by who wrote or uploaded them, and the same goes for userboxes too. Either keep a list, use "what links here" or the prefix index.
BencherliteTalk20:06, 28 June 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.
United States radio templates
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 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.
Northern Exposure
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete both - the cast subcat is improper performer by performanceovercategorization. The category for the series is eponymous overcategorization per hundreds of precedents and is also a small category with no growth potential. The show's article serves as an appropriate navigational hub.
Otto4711 (
talk)
17:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom; though maybe a speedy should be avoided due to the paucity of input in the former CfD, but I certainly wouldn't oppose a speedy delete.
Good Ol’factory(talk)02:11, 1 July 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.
Category:Walking with series
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete - main article
Walking with... serves as an appropriate navigational hub. There is also a complete template. No need for the eponymous category. If retained, it needs to be renamed because the current name is unclear.
Otto4711 (
talk)
16:56, 28 June 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.
Category:TVyNovelas Awards
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete - all of the subcats are going to be speedily deleted as a result of a previous CFD. The category is not needed to hold just the main article.
Otto4711 (
talk)
16:41, 28 June 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.
Category:Presidents of the American Bar Association
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.
Nominator's rationale:Discuss - a
previous CFR resulted in the renaming of this category from "Presidents of the ABA" but sentiment was expressed that the category be deleted as non-defining in favor of the list. It was suggested that the category be renamed and then nominated for deletion. The first part happened so here's part two. I don't have strong feelings either way.
Otto4711 (
talk)
16:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Keep One could argue that this was equivalent to categorisation by award (which we regularly delete and listify), but to be president of a major professional body is rather more than a trivial award. We have retained Nobel prize categories and certain other important award categories. I would suggest that this an important enough position for its retention. Note: I am English.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:21, 29 June 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.
Actively undergoing
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:keep. The categories are used to find forgotten {{inuse}} and {{underconstruction}} tagged pages. I am one of those people who forgets about them. Evidently we need a way to find these articles and links will not do. Renaming seems pointless when they are hidden, maintenance cats.
Angus McLellan(Talk)16:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Rename as nom: Not all of the pages in these categories are articles. In fact in the first category alone, most would fall into the "other" area, if this existed. For example, user pages, general Wikipedia pages, project pages, portals etc.
Simply south (
talk)
16:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment I also wonder about the value of these categories. I suppose it is to enable Admins to delete these tags if they have been there sometime without progress being made. However, if they are not useful, they should certainly be deleted.
Both are supposed to temporary, in place for a matter of hours & days respectively. If anyone watches the categories, they could be used to detect one forgotten about & left in place too long. But it might be a big if. Looking at some,
Facility condition assessment (major edit) had not changed in 4 days, so I removed the tag. Nearly all of the rest of these seem to be on user sub-pages, where it seems odd to use "in use" at all. Template George Best has not been edited since April (Rich Farnborough if you please).
Johnbod (
talk)
22:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Keep for now - See comment above - I'm loath to delete unless there is another way of tracking these templates, which seem often forgotten about.
Johnbod (
talk)
22:39, 29 June 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.
Category:Drafted Norwegians
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 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.
Category:Female American state legislators
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 to
Category:American women state legislators. There were several issues raised in the discussion. There was consensus for this rename. The other issues raised they did not produce a consensus. Those other points can be raised again in a new nomination.
Vegaswikian (
talk)
19:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)reply
This was a tricky one to name, as
Category:State legislators of the United States and
Category:American women in politics have conflicting naming conventions; the latter, in fact, doesn't have a clear convention at all, but instead has subcategories named in several different formats. As the creator, I have no preference as to the potential new title for this, except to note that it might be worth reviewing as to whether a consistent naming convention could possibly be applied to both parents. As well, the {{popcat}} template needs to be maintained on it at this time, as the category currently contains only a small minority of its total potential population.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)reply
I've given some thought to how & why the two naming conventions are applied, and my sense of things is that people feel that it just doesn't sound right to put "women" directly in front of "United States" -- whereas using it in other word-combinations doesn't seem to bother most people. I suppose it could just take some "getting used to". In any event, as much as it would in principle be nice to agree on a single all-encompassing naming convention, it may simply not be possible to do so.
Cgingold (
talk)
23:46, 30 June 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.
Category:Rhino albums
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.
Nominator's rationale:Merge, Looks like the category was created without realizing one already existed under a slightly different name.
Wolfer68 (
talk)
07:39, 28 June 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.
Category:Seoul Metropolitan Subway templates
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 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.
Category:Kowloon-Canton Railway templates
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 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.
Category:Split by month
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.
Possibly Rename -
Category:articles to be split by month. This might be a useful category for identifying articles nominated for splitting a long time ago, for which some final decision is needed. However, is there a bot that adds dates to "split" tags? If not, this category will be difficult to maintain and should be upmerged, and (perhaps) the monthly categories deleted too.
Category:Articles to be split currently contains rather over 200 items, making it rather too large to be convenient.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:15, 29 June 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.