Category:People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
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 - minus the improperly categorized people there really isn't enough material to warrant a standalone category. Articles about the organization and a couple of its campaigns plus some articles that are "PETA was involved" tangetial relationships. Navigation through the lead article is sufficient.
Are You The Cow Of Pain? (
talk)
20:07, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep - I'm afraid I have to disagree with CoP's assessment of this category. Even if every single celebrity is cleared out, that still leaves 8 or 9 articles -- plus all of the photo files. (And I suspect that at least 1 or 2 of those celebs has had substantial enough involvement to warrant use of this category.)
Cgingold (
talk)
20:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
That is the only one that's borderline, hence the "8 or 9" articles -- and possibly 1 or 2 more among all of the celebs. Not to mention the great likelihood that there will be additional articles in the future.
Cgingold (
talk)
22:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Purge -- The headnote says this is about PETA (which I have expanded) not about people, but the category is full of people. Some one needs manually to purge this category so that it contains PETA, its campaigns, staff, and board members. The rest need to go into a subcat of "supporters" or "endorsers", but since this will rarely be a notable characteristic, I suspect that the new supporters category would quickly be deleted.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
22:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)reply
keep as is. Articles are sufficient. There are a few people articles that need to be deleted as there is no content in the article to support the category. In other cases, these people have been involved in PETA campaigns, ads, etc and this info is found in the bio articles. Category is appropriate.
Hmains (
talk)
03:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep category but limit it to articles direclty related to the organization, not to celebrity endorsers. Per
Wikipedia:Categorization of people we should be limiting categories of people to what's truly important about them, and most of these people are not notable for this activity. The celebrities who've endorsed PETA may be an appropriate list at the PETA page and, if they are legion, might warrant a separate catogory, but generally categories about people should be kept separate from categories about general subjects. --
Moonriddengirl(talk)20:47, 13 August 2010 (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:The Bionic 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.
The result of the discussion was:rename as nominated. There really doesn't seem to be a perfect answer to this, but
Category:Bionic franchise is better than the other two options, as neither "series" nor "Man" is helpful in defining something that contains multiple series about men and women.--
Mike Selinker (
talk)
07:00, 16 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Rename - "series" isn't an accurate description of a collection of articles that refer to three TV series and a book series. Not married to the word "franchise" so please suggest any alternatives that may be better.
Are You The Cow Of Pain? (
talk)
18:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
SuggestCategory:Bionic Man franchise ... as it combines the names of the two most prominent pieces of the franchise, and it was also a product of the franchise (see this website: activerain.com/blogsview/584437/bionic-man-doll-six-million-dollar-memories- :for scans of the packaging) (hence, not an
WP:OR name, since it was used by the franchise).
76.66.193.119 (
talk)
05:18, 7 August 2010 (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:Albums produced by A.B. Quintanilla
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:Archie Comics locations
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:Archie comic book covers
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:Eclipse
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.
sub-categories of Category:Carnivorans
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:Rename. Remove ambiguity in category names - for example (yes, I know that these examples are irrelevant for the specific categoruis under discussion), the
Cobra is a carnivore (it eats meat), but isn't a member of order
Carnivora; the
Giant Panda is a carnivoran, but not a carnovore.
עוד מישהוOd Mishehu07:48, 5 August 2010 (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:International venture capital firms
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:Mobile venture capital firms
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:Wireless venture capital firms
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:Michael Jackson images and files
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:People by city district or neighborhood
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.
Keep as an appropriate means of organizing such categories as a parent. Its existence does not mean that all neighborhoods in all localities will be categorized, but for those that do merit categorization this is an appropriate parent.
Alansohn (
talk)
04:39, 27 July 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep – some think the name is too long, others think it too short; so it will do just fine. (The London ones seem perfectly valid. As Alansohn remarks, some cities are not vast enough to require splitting by sub-region but others are.)
Occuli (
talk)
08:23, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
REname but Monte Carlo does not belong since this is the main settlement on Monaco, not a neighbourhood of a larger city. Since most members are American, I do not object to the American spelling.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
22:30, 6 August 2010 (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.
Córdoba, Argentina (city)
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.
Support Renames, but drop '(city)' from proposed titles The article
Córdoba, Argentina is properly titled to distinguish it both from the city of the same name in Spain and the larger province in Argentina. There appears to be no benefit in having the category titles conflict with that of the parent article, and only the prospect of added confusion caused by the discrepancy. If the article title is not sufficiently clear, any ambiguity should be addressed by proposing a rename of the article, not here.
Alansohn (
talk)
19:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator formulated it. Category names should not be as ambiguous as article names, since it causes maintainence issues. As the province has the same name, it is highly likely that province articles not directly related to the city will be dumped into the category. It would reduce confusion due to better naming.
76.66.193.119 (
talk)
05:37, 6 August 2010 (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:Geothermal energy
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.
Comment. In general I support this proposal to make this category to be in line with the main article but at the same time geothermal power is a product generated by using geothermal energy. It seems that the name of the main article's title
Geothermal power is misleading as it talks about the geothermal electricity and geothermal heating both. Heating is not classified usually under 'power'. Several wikies in other languages use in their articles' titles word 'energy' not 'power', or just 'geothermal' as the German wiki.
Beagel (
talk)
04:04, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Reverse merge as this would provide a broader category, including the use of Geothermal energy directly for heating, for example in a district heating system. I suspect this is widely done in Iceland.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
22:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Reverse merge per remarks of Beagel and Peterkingiron. Regardless of the main article situation, it makes more sense to have the broader category.
Cgingold (
talk)
23:56, 6 August 2010 (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:Meritas members
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.
Delete - This one-article category is not the sort of thing we endorse having categories for -- membership in ordinary, run-of-the-mill organizations, of which there are 100s of 1000s. Category creator notified using {{cfd-notify}}Cgingold (
talk)
02:00, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep and populate - If I understand the articel correctly, Meritas is an international network of law firms, on its way to being an international conglomerate. The members will thus be major law firms in various countries. This is clearly a notable and defining characteristic.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
22:37, 6 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete. I definitely think this is not defining. Once upon a time I worked for a law firm that has since become a member of Meritas, and it's certainly not defining for this particular firm. Law firms are often part of these international or intranational "groups", but it doesn't really mean much. We have no overarching scheme of "law firms by inter-association".
Good Ol’factory(talk)22:07, 8 August 2010 (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:Platforms of the SSP
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:Closer's choice?. We'll go with rename for now, as the more conservative option, with leave to renominate for a dual upmerge if desired.
Courcelles03:07, 15 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Rename or upmerge – I (UK-based and moderately well-informed) have never heard the word used in this sense (although I see it is used in this sense in both articles - indeed we have the phrase "with its members becoming non-platform members of the SSP", which could do with translating from the original gibberish).
Occuli (
talk)
14:56, 5 August 2010 (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:People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
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 - minus the improperly categorized people there really isn't enough material to warrant a standalone category. Articles about the organization and a couple of its campaigns plus some articles that are "PETA was involved" tangetial relationships. Navigation through the lead article is sufficient.
Are You The Cow Of Pain? (
talk)
20:07, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep - I'm afraid I have to disagree with CoP's assessment of this category. Even if every single celebrity is cleared out, that still leaves 8 or 9 articles -- plus all of the photo files. (And I suspect that at least 1 or 2 of those celebs has had substantial enough involvement to warrant use of this category.)
Cgingold (
talk)
20:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
That is the only one that's borderline, hence the "8 or 9" articles -- and possibly 1 or 2 more among all of the celebs. Not to mention the great likelihood that there will be additional articles in the future.
Cgingold (
talk)
22:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Purge -- The headnote says this is about PETA (which I have expanded) not about people, but the category is full of people. Some one needs manually to purge this category so that it contains PETA, its campaigns, staff, and board members. The rest need to go into a subcat of "supporters" or "endorsers", but since this will rarely be a notable characteristic, I suspect that the new supporters category would quickly be deleted.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
22:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)reply
keep as is. Articles are sufficient. There are a few people articles that need to be deleted as there is no content in the article to support the category. In other cases, these people have been involved in PETA campaigns, ads, etc and this info is found in the bio articles. Category is appropriate.
Hmains (
talk)
03:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep category but limit it to articles direclty related to the organization, not to celebrity endorsers. Per
Wikipedia:Categorization of people we should be limiting categories of people to what's truly important about them, and most of these people are not notable for this activity. The celebrities who've endorsed PETA may be an appropriate list at the PETA page and, if they are legion, might warrant a separate catogory, but generally categories about people should be kept separate from categories about general subjects. --
Moonriddengirl(talk)20:47, 13 August 2010 (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:The Bionic 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.
The result of the discussion was:rename as nominated. There really doesn't seem to be a perfect answer to this, but
Category:Bionic franchise is better than the other two options, as neither "series" nor "Man" is helpful in defining something that contains multiple series about men and women.--
Mike Selinker (
talk)
07:00, 16 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Rename - "series" isn't an accurate description of a collection of articles that refer to three TV series and a book series. Not married to the word "franchise" so please suggest any alternatives that may be better.
Are You The Cow Of Pain? (
talk)
18:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
SuggestCategory:Bionic Man franchise ... as it combines the names of the two most prominent pieces of the franchise, and it was also a product of the franchise (see this website: activerain.com/blogsview/584437/bionic-man-doll-six-million-dollar-memories- :for scans of the packaging) (hence, not an
WP:OR name, since it was used by the franchise).
76.66.193.119 (
talk)
05:18, 7 August 2010 (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:Albums produced by A.B. Quintanilla
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:Archie Comics locations
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:Archie comic book covers
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:Eclipse
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.
sub-categories of Category:Carnivorans
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:Rename. Remove ambiguity in category names - for example (yes, I know that these examples are irrelevant for the specific categoruis under discussion), the
Cobra is a carnivore (it eats meat), but isn't a member of order
Carnivora; the
Giant Panda is a carnivoran, but not a carnovore.
עוד מישהוOd Mishehu07:48, 5 August 2010 (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:International venture capital firms
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:Mobile venture capital firms
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:Wireless venture capital firms
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:Michael Jackson images and files
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:People by city district or neighborhood
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.
Keep as an appropriate means of organizing such categories as a parent. Its existence does not mean that all neighborhoods in all localities will be categorized, but for those that do merit categorization this is an appropriate parent.
Alansohn (
talk)
04:39, 27 July 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep – some think the name is too long, others think it too short; so it will do just fine. (The London ones seem perfectly valid. As Alansohn remarks, some cities are not vast enough to require splitting by sub-region but others are.)
Occuli (
talk)
08:23, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
REname but Monte Carlo does not belong since this is the main settlement on Monaco, not a neighbourhood of a larger city. Since most members are American, I do not object to the American spelling.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
22:30, 6 August 2010 (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.
Córdoba, Argentina (city)
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.
Support Renames, but drop '(city)' from proposed titles The article
Córdoba, Argentina is properly titled to distinguish it both from the city of the same name in Spain and the larger province in Argentina. There appears to be no benefit in having the category titles conflict with that of the parent article, and only the prospect of added confusion caused by the discrepancy. If the article title is not sufficiently clear, any ambiguity should be addressed by proposing a rename of the article, not here.
Alansohn (
talk)
19:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator formulated it. Category names should not be as ambiguous as article names, since it causes maintainence issues. As the province has the same name, it is highly likely that province articles not directly related to the city will be dumped into the category. It would reduce confusion due to better naming.
76.66.193.119 (
talk)
05:37, 6 August 2010 (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:Geothermal energy
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.
Comment. In general I support this proposal to make this category to be in line with the main article but at the same time geothermal power is a product generated by using geothermal energy. It seems that the name of the main article's title
Geothermal power is misleading as it talks about the geothermal electricity and geothermal heating both. Heating is not classified usually under 'power'. Several wikies in other languages use in their articles' titles word 'energy' not 'power', or just 'geothermal' as the German wiki.
Beagel (
talk)
04:04, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Reverse merge as this would provide a broader category, including the use of Geothermal energy directly for heating, for example in a district heating system. I suspect this is widely done in Iceland.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
22:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Reverse merge per remarks of Beagel and Peterkingiron. Regardless of the main article situation, it makes more sense to have the broader category.
Cgingold (
talk)
23:56, 6 August 2010 (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:Meritas members
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.
Delete - This one-article category is not the sort of thing we endorse having categories for -- membership in ordinary, run-of-the-mill organizations, of which there are 100s of 1000s. Category creator notified using {{cfd-notify}}Cgingold (
talk)
02:00, 5 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep and populate - If I understand the articel correctly, Meritas is an international network of law firms, on its way to being an international conglomerate. The members will thus be major law firms in various countries. This is clearly a notable and defining characteristic.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
22:37, 6 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete. I definitely think this is not defining. Once upon a time I worked for a law firm that has since become a member of Meritas, and it's certainly not defining for this particular firm. Law firms are often part of these international or intranational "groups", but it doesn't really mean much. We have no overarching scheme of "law firms by inter-association".
Good Ol’factory(talk)22:07, 8 August 2010 (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:Platforms of the SSP
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:Closer's choice?. We'll go with rename for now, as the more conservative option, with leave to renominate for a dual upmerge if desired.
Courcelles03:07, 15 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Rename or upmerge – I (UK-based and moderately well-informed) have never heard the word used in this sense (although I see it is used in this sense in both articles - indeed we have the phrase "with its members becoming non-platform members of the SSP", which could do with translating from the original gibberish).
Occuli (
talk)
14:56, 5 August 2010 (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.