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. The alternate rename is reasonable, but the original nomination makes it clearer that the medals are those from the Olympics.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 17:56, 28 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Most of these folks aren't "athletes" in the sense they did not compete in
Athletics (sport). For AMENG this is fine, but for some varieties of English, having a cross-country skier in this category is rather odd.
Courcelles 21:14, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Semantics. What a waste of time. --
Scorpion0422 15:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom -- This is clear. Being stipped of a medal is a rare event. Only an Olympic competitor can be stripped of an Olympic medal. The basis of the nom is the differnet usage of athlete between US and UK, one limiting it to track and field, but I doubt there are enough cases for much splitting by sport to be needed.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 15:56, 23 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. The issue is that the medals are olympic, thus the olympic should be modifying that term.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:35, 24 September 2012 (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:Occupy movement in Armenia
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.
Upmerge per BHG and others. Unlikely to be much better populated.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 13:17, 24 September 2012 (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:Making Fiends
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.
Timrollpickering (
talk) 19:20, 25 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:WP:SMALLCAT. Only four article entries and the navbox, which itself fails
WP:NENAN. I see no growth of the category, particularly since a Making Fiends-related article was just deleted. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 17:36, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete the subject is adequately linked from the main article.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:36, 24 September 2012 (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:Nazis killed in the Beer Hall Putsch
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.
Timrollpickering (
talk) 19:19, 25 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete per nominator. It seems that most of the contents have been merged to
Beer Hall Putsch, so we are left with a category full of redirects to one page. That's pointless. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 17:27, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete no point in having a virtually all redirect category.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 17:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete. Most of the pages had very little content, so I merged them into the list within the article. I was going to wait and see if the merger is accepted before nominating the new category for deletion myself, but one NPOV historian has already said the merger was good work, so there is probably no need to delay. For the record: (1) The contents are all within
Category:Nazis who participated in the Beer Hall Putsch, so there is no need to upmerge. (2) The other 3 articles that were previously in
Category:Nazi martyrs are now interlinked via each article's "see also" section, with the less POV heading "Others given posthumous fame by the Nazis". –
FayenaticLondon 17:44, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
No objection to what you did. Just noting that the circumstances of my close were different, and those differences suggest a new result to me.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 18:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
No objection to your previous close, either! –
FayenaticLondon 18:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete: no need to keep as it has only basically become a redundant redirect cat, as well stated above.
Kierzek (
talk) 18:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete -- The only remaining issue is whether we may need to find another category to reflect that
Max Erwin von Scheubner-Richter died in the putsch. Otherwise the category is empty apart from its main article and redirects.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 13:23, 24 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Cmt - given the clear consensus to delete; the discussion should be closed and matter executed (keeping in mind Peterkingiron's note above).
Kierzek (
talk) 13:29, 24 September 2012 (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:G.I. Joe media
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.
Timrollpickering (
talk) 19:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Rename. To be more in line with similar Wikipedia categories.
Category:G.I. Joe media contains nothing but images, and it is a subcategory of
Category:Images from fiction, where none of the other sub-categories contain the word "media". In addition, all the G.I. Joe sub-categories should be renamed accordingly:
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:Drone doom 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.
The result of the discussion was:Upmerge.
Timrollpickering (
talk) 19:21, 25 September 2012 (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:Cedar Fair Entertainment Company task force
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.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 17:57, 28 October 2012 (UTC)reply
The Cedar Fair task force was never a separate WikiProject. It was created as a task force due to some Wikipedians' interest in the area. Not sure why
WP:WikiProject Cedar Fair was created later. Themeparkgc Talk 22:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment. I'm not sure that the article move is directly relevant. It seems to me that the task force category names should align with those of the task force itself ... and that may not necessarily match the name of a head article. I would usually say that these are project categories, so the project should have a lot of leeway in naming its own categories, but there is something odd about this.
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amusement Parks/Task Forces/Cedar Fair is a redlink, so does this task force actually exist? Also, these category renamings have not been notified to the parent project
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amusement Parks, so other project members will be unaware of what's happening to the categories. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 06:09, 19 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose for now per my comments above. Whatever name the task force categories are at should be consistent between the categories, and this nomination of a subset will cause inconsistency. Also, the WikiProject should be notified, so that the project members can explain why we apparently have categories for a task force which has never been active. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 06:12, 19 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose per BrownHairedGirl. If WikiProject consensus at a later date is to rename them, then we can open a new discussion. Themeparkgc Talk 23:56, 17 October 2012 (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:Walt Disney World Resort
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: Per page move
Astros4477 (
talk) 02:22, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Question. Which page was moved, and when? Was it as the result of a move discussion? --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 16:10, 18 September 2012 (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.
New Categories synonymous with Category:Propaganda
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:WP:SMALLCAT. Both of these towns have under 2000 people, so these categories are unlikely to expand. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 00:04, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Merge both per nominator and per
WP:SMALLCAT. I have checked the backlinks to both
Durant, Iowa and
Blue Grass, Iowa, and have searched for both terms ... but found nothing to add to these categories. Given the small size of both towns, I see no prospect of expansion. However, the county seat of
Muscatine, Iowa has a population of 20,000 and most of the articles in the county category relate to people from that town. So those articles should be diffused to a
Category:People from Muscatine, Iowa. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 10:29, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Merge Durant, keep Blue Grass per John Pack Lambert (changing my !vote). JPL makes a good about about the dual parenting, and without the town category, People from Blue Grass, Iowa are likely to be categorised under only one of the relevant counties. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
Merge both per nom and precedent.
Oculi (
talk) 13:09, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Support for Durant.
Blue Grass, Iowa however is in both Muscatine and Scott counties, and most of it is in Scott County, so I have to oppose the proposed merger. Multi-county cities are a special case that can be justified having from categories even when they are quite small.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:43, 24 September 2012 (UTC)reply
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. The alternate rename is reasonable, but the original nomination makes it clearer that the medals are those from the Olympics.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 17:56, 28 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Most of these folks aren't "athletes" in the sense they did not compete in
Athletics (sport). For AMENG this is fine, but for some varieties of English, having a cross-country skier in this category is rather odd.
Courcelles 21:14, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Semantics. What a waste of time. --
Scorpion0422 15:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom -- This is clear. Being stipped of a medal is a rare event. Only an Olympic competitor can be stripped of an Olympic medal. The basis of the nom is the differnet usage of athlete between US and UK, one limiting it to track and field, but I doubt there are enough cases for much splitting by sport to be needed.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 15:56, 23 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. The issue is that the medals are olympic, thus the olympic should be modifying that term.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:35, 24 September 2012 (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:Occupy movement in Armenia
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.
Upmerge per BHG and others. Unlikely to be much better populated.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 13:17, 24 September 2012 (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:Making Fiends
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.
Timrollpickering (
talk) 19:20, 25 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:WP:SMALLCAT. Only four article entries and the navbox, which itself fails
WP:NENAN. I see no growth of the category, particularly since a Making Fiends-related article was just deleted. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 17:36, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete the subject is adequately linked from the main article.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:36, 24 September 2012 (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:Nazis killed in the Beer Hall Putsch
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.
Timrollpickering (
talk) 19:19, 25 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete per nominator. It seems that most of the contents have been merged to
Beer Hall Putsch, so we are left with a category full of redirects to one page. That's pointless. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 17:27, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete no point in having a virtually all redirect category.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 17:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete. Most of the pages had very little content, so I merged them into the list within the article. I was going to wait and see if the merger is accepted before nominating the new category for deletion myself, but one NPOV historian has already said the merger was good work, so there is probably no need to delay. For the record: (1) The contents are all within
Category:Nazis who participated in the Beer Hall Putsch, so there is no need to upmerge. (2) The other 3 articles that were previously in
Category:Nazi martyrs are now interlinked via each article's "see also" section, with the less POV heading "Others given posthumous fame by the Nazis". –
FayenaticLondon 17:44, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
No objection to what you did. Just noting that the circumstances of my close were different, and those differences suggest a new result to me.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 18:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
No objection to your previous close, either! –
FayenaticLondon 18:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete: no need to keep as it has only basically become a redundant redirect cat, as well stated above.
Kierzek (
talk) 18:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete -- The only remaining issue is whether we may need to find another category to reflect that
Max Erwin von Scheubner-Richter died in the putsch. Otherwise the category is empty apart from its main article and redirects.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 13:23, 24 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Cmt - given the clear consensus to delete; the discussion should be closed and matter executed (keeping in mind Peterkingiron's note above).
Kierzek (
talk) 13:29, 24 September 2012 (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:G.I. Joe media
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.
Timrollpickering (
talk) 19:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Rename. To be more in line with similar Wikipedia categories.
Category:G.I. Joe media contains nothing but images, and it is a subcategory of
Category:Images from fiction, where none of the other sub-categories contain the word "media". In addition, all the G.I. Joe sub-categories should be renamed accordingly:
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:Drone doom 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.
The result of the discussion was:Upmerge.
Timrollpickering (
talk) 19:21, 25 September 2012 (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:Cedar Fair Entertainment Company task force
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.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 17:57, 28 October 2012 (UTC)reply
The Cedar Fair task force was never a separate WikiProject. It was created as a task force due to some Wikipedians' interest in the area. Not sure why
WP:WikiProject Cedar Fair was created later. Themeparkgc Talk 22:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment. I'm not sure that the article move is directly relevant. It seems to me that the task force category names should align with those of the task force itself ... and that may not necessarily match the name of a head article. I would usually say that these are project categories, so the project should have a lot of leeway in naming its own categories, but there is something odd about this.
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amusement Parks/Task Forces/Cedar Fair is a redlink, so does this task force actually exist? Also, these category renamings have not been notified to the parent project
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amusement Parks, so other project members will be unaware of what's happening to the categories. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 06:09, 19 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose for now per my comments above. Whatever name the task force categories are at should be consistent between the categories, and this nomination of a subset will cause inconsistency. Also, the WikiProject should be notified, so that the project members can explain why we apparently have categories for a task force which has never been active. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 06:12, 19 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose per BrownHairedGirl. If WikiProject consensus at a later date is to rename them, then we can open a new discussion. Themeparkgc Talk 23:56, 17 October 2012 (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:Walt Disney World Resort
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: Per page move
Astros4477 (
talk) 02:22, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Question. Which page was moved, and when? Was it as the result of a move discussion? --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 16:10, 18 September 2012 (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.
New Categories synonymous with Category:Propaganda
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:WP:SMALLCAT. Both of these towns have under 2000 people, so these categories are unlikely to expand. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 00:04, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Merge both per nominator and per
WP:SMALLCAT. I have checked the backlinks to both
Durant, Iowa and
Blue Grass, Iowa, and have searched for both terms ... but found nothing to add to these categories. Given the small size of both towns, I see no prospect of expansion. However, the county seat of
Muscatine, Iowa has a population of 20,000 and most of the articles in the county category relate to people from that town. So those articles should be diffused to a
Category:People from Muscatine, Iowa. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 10:29, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Merge Durant, keep Blue Grass per John Pack Lambert (changing my !vote). JPL makes a good about about the dual parenting, and without the town category, People from Blue Grass, Iowa are likely to be categorised under only one of the relevant counties. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
Merge both per nom and precedent.
Oculi (
talk) 13:09, 18 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Support for Durant.
Blue Grass, Iowa however is in both Muscatine and Scott counties, and most of it is in Scott County, so I have to oppose the proposed merger. Multi-county cities are a special case that can be justified having from categories even when they are quite small.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:43, 24 September 2012 (UTC)reply