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: Def American Recordings is the former name of the record label American Recordings. A new (set of) categories is not needed every time organization's merely change names (mergers are more complex), and the contents of this category belong in the category that carries the label's current name. (Category creator notified using
Template:Cfd-notify) -- Black Falcon(
talk) 23:57, 30 March 2014 (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:World War II British vehicles
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:Renault vehicles
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:no consensus for all three of these discussions. It appears to me that it would be desirable to have a split to cars/automobiles, but that would lead to a good deal of work and needs a clearer consensus before starting. Maybe a
WP:RFC at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles would be a good place to take this next. –
FayenaticLondon 11:23, 12 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Split. See Volvo and BMW below. It seems that CFD is not needed so this will be the last one. Did not notice before I added the CFS on the category :-)
MGA73 (
talk) 20:11, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment "automobile" is used by
the Automobile Association, one of the oldest of its kind, which is British. "automobile" is also quite frequently used in Canada, so not just USA. And
"automobile" has the advantage of also being French, and Renault is a French company. --
70.24.250.235 (
talk) 08:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Split. A
vehicle can be more than a car. There can als be motorcycles. So "BMW vehicles" should be the top category for "BMW motorcycles" and "BMW automobiles"..
MGA73 (
talk) 19:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Support. The present category structure incorrectly puts
BMW vehicles (including motorcycles) under an Automobiles category. You don't need a CFD discussion to create
Category:BMW automobiles and correct the structure.
DexDor (
talk) 19:23, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Okay. I'm not a car expert. I'm just trying to fix interwiki conflicts :-) --
MGA73 (
talk) 20:25, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep. There is no
Category:Cars by brand or any similar tree; creating one would be a huge project. Below the
Category:Vehicles by brand there is only subcategorization for motorcycles, aircraft, trucks, agricultural and military vehicles, and so on which are not passenger vehicles, and we already have
Category:BMW motorcycles alongside
Category:Honda motorcycles and so on. The general problem of these categories being improperly parented by Cars of categories (problematic not only because vehicles is not a subset of cars, but because the nationality of the headquarters of the manufacturer is debatable for determining the nationality of a car) is widespread and someting of a red herring here.
66.16.149.60 (
talk) 19:33, 1 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Split. A
vehicle can be more than a car. There can als be buses and trucks. So "Volvo vehicles" should be the top category for "Volvo Buses", "Volvo Trucks" and "Volvo automobiles".
MGA73 (
talk) 19:00, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Support (per above).
DexDor (
talk) 19:25, 30 March 2014 (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 claiming to have psychokinetic abilities
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: None of the other paranormal cats have this modifier - the proposed name isn't common but does show up in scifi lit as well as one honest to goodness book I could find (do google book search to find sorry on mobile). Rename in line with other cats like
Category:Psychics and
Category:TelepathsObi-Wan Kenobi (
talk) 16:20, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Support per nominator. This category was merely created per a previous Categories for Renaming vote while I was one of the Category Admin's. Have no preference or quarrel with it's removal or renaming, therefore I defer to the consensus or the nominator's suggestion.
«»Who?¿? 22:10, 30 March 2014 (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:Former officers of the University Philosophical Society
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 – In almost every case, this characteristic will not be defining for someone who passes the
notability threshold. In other words, people do not become notable by virtue of being officers of the Phil; instead, people who were officers of the Phil sometimes went on to do other things that made them notable. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 01:00, 1 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete Not defining to enough of these people to be worth categorizing by.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 22:52, 5 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete -- Being an office holder in a student society will rarely be defining. If kept, rename to include "Trinity College Dublin".
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:32, 6 April 2014 (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:Ex-Presidents of India
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:speedy mergeWP:G7 (see my talk page). –
FayenaticLondon 20:47, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Upmerge. This was newly split by an inexperienced editor. We do not split current and former office-holders within the many sub-cats of
Category:Office-holders. –
FayenaticLondon 13:25, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Upmerge per nom.
Oculi (
talk) 15:44, 30 March 2014 (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:George Temple Poole buildings
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:speedy rename. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 21:32, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Support For future reference, this could have been handled more simply at
WP:SPEEDY, because of the typo, its difference from the main article (if any) and because it's now empty.
Shawn in Montreal (
talk) 16:37, 30 March 2014 (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:Cultural heritage of Indonesia
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:withdrawn. –
FayenaticLondon 13:39, 4 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Is there a possibility for expansion? In other words, does Indonesia have cultural heritage not formally recognized as "
cultural properties and, just as importantly, can we categorize them objectively? -- Black Falcon(
talk) 21:29, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
You are right, there is a category for World Heritage Sites in Indonesia. I have now put it into this one, and withdraw the nomination. –
FayenaticLondon 19:37, 1 April 2014 (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:Kronos-Saturn
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 for now; if a user wants to propose splitting the new category, feel free to do so in a new nomination. Given that the article is at
Cronus, there's not really a good reason to have the category use the "Kronos" spelling.
Good Ol’factory(talk) 00:31, 10 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: The article is at
Cronus; not keen on the format but can't think of anything better.
Tim! (
talk) 07:37, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Rename, or split, to
Category:Cronus or
Category:Saturn (mythology). This category contains a mix of articles related to the Greek god
Cronus, the Roman god
Saturn, and the planet
Saturn in mythology. The combined name makes me think of some type of mythological or comic-book amalgamation. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 23:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep -- If anything it is the article that should be renamed. The lead says "Cronus or Kronos". This is about a Greek God, whose name begins with a K - kappa. It is a question of whether that letter is transliterated as C or K. Cronus is a latinisation of the name, with the Latin male ending -us rather than the Greek one of -os (both second declension singular). Greek and Roman gods with similar attributes were frequently identified with each other, including the Greek Zeus with the Roman Jupiter, so that I see no objection to a joint category.
Cronos is currently a dabpage.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:41, 6 April 2014 (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:Goldman Environmental Prize winners
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.
This award goes to "grassroots environmental activists" from Africa, Asia, Europe, Islands and Island Nations, North America, and South and Central America. Each receives a whopping US$150,000 per recipient. That's pretty life-changing money for a grassroots activist in, say, the developing world. It's awarded by an international journey. Are we sure this isn't a defining characteristic for honourees, in line with
WP:OC/AWARD?
Shawn in Montreal (
talk) 16:42, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
That amount of money may be life-changing for some people, but in other cases (
example) having received the award isn't even (currently) mentioned in the article.
DexDor (
talk) 19:33, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
I'm not confident enough on this one to record a !vote either way. What's more, I'm sure in my early days here I'd created an awards cat or two that might not pass muster. But not recently, I assure you.
Shawn in Montreal (
talk) 17:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete This award is not defining in general to the recipients. There is a very high threshold for award categories, and this does not pass it.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 22:14, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete -- another unnecessary award winners category.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:42, 6 April 2014 (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:Indianapolis Prize winners
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 first-place unrestricted cash prize of US$250,000, possibly
the highest of any conservation award, makes the Indianapolis Prize a prestigious and desirable award. However, even after working on the article (
diff), I can't say for sure that receiving the prize is
defining; typically, prize winners are already well-known for their other work. I think that this might just pass the threshold for being a
defining characteristic, but it is difficult to evaluate due to the fact that the award is only a few years old. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 21:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete This award is not defining enough of its recipients to be worth categorizing by.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 22:14, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete -- another unnecessary award winners category.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:42, 6 April 2014 (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:Albanian nationalism
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.
reverse merge per facts stated by Black Falcon.
Hmains (
talk) 03:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC)reply
That essentially what I wanted also, I should have made that more clear.
Charles Essie (
talk) 17:17, 1 April 2014 (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.
Nominator's rationale: Def American Recordings is the former name of the record label American Recordings. A new (set of) categories is not needed every time organization's merely change names (mergers are more complex), and the contents of this category belong in the category that carries the label's current name. (Category creator notified using
Template:Cfd-notify) -- Black Falcon(
talk) 23:57, 30 March 2014 (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:World War II British vehicles
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:Renault vehicles
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:no consensus for all three of these discussions. It appears to me that it would be desirable to have a split to cars/automobiles, but that would lead to a good deal of work and needs a clearer consensus before starting. Maybe a
WP:RFC at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles would be a good place to take this next. –
FayenaticLondon 11:23, 12 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Split. See Volvo and BMW below. It seems that CFD is not needed so this will be the last one. Did not notice before I added the CFS on the category :-)
MGA73 (
talk) 20:11, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment "automobile" is used by
the Automobile Association, one of the oldest of its kind, which is British. "automobile" is also quite frequently used in Canada, so not just USA. And
"automobile" has the advantage of also being French, and Renault is a French company. --
70.24.250.235 (
talk) 08:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Split. A
vehicle can be more than a car. There can als be motorcycles. So "BMW vehicles" should be the top category for "BMW motorcycles" and "BMW automobiles"..
MGA73 (
talk) 19:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Support. The present category structure incorrectly puts
BMW vehicles (including motorcycles) under an Automobiles category. You don't need a CFD discussion to create
Category:BMW automobiles and correct the structure.
DexDor (
talk) 19:23, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Okay. I'm not a car expert. I'm just trying to fix interwiki conflicts :-) --
MGA73 (
talk) 20:25, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep. There is no
Category:Cars by brand or any similar tree; creating one would be a huge project. Below the
Category:Vehicles by brand there is only subcategorization for motorcycles, aircraft, trucks, agricultural and military vehicles, and so on which are not passenger vehicles, and we already have
Category:BMW motorcycles alongside
Category:Honda motorcycles and so on. The general problem of these categories being improperly parented by Cars of categories (problematic not only because vehicles is not a subset of cars, but because the nationality of the headquarters of the manufacturer is debatable for determining the nationality of a car) is widespread and someting of a red herring here.
66.16.149.60 (
talk) 19:33, 1 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Split. A
vehicle can be more than a car. There can als be buses and trucks. So "Volvo vehicles" should be the top category for "Volvo Buses", "Volvo Trucks" and "Volvo automobiles".
MGA73 (
talk) 19:00, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Support (per above).
DexDor (
talk) 19:25, 30 March 2014 (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 claiming to have psychokinetic abilities
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: None of the other paranormal cats have this modifier - the proposed name isn't common but does show up in scifi lit as well as one honest to goodness book I could find (do google book search to find sorry on mobile). Rename in line with other cats like
Category:Psychics and
Category:TelepathsObi-Wan Kenobi (
talk) 16:20, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Support per nominator. This category was merely created per a previous Categories for Renaming vote while I was one of the Category Admin's. Have no preference or quarrel with it's removal or renaming, therefore I defer to the consensus or the nominator's suggestion.
«»Who?¿? 22:10, 30 March 2014 (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:Former officers of the University Philosophical Society
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 – In almost every case, this characteristic will not be defining for someone who passes the
notability threshold. In other words, people do not become notable by virtue of being officers of the Phil; instead, people who were officers of the Phil sometimes went on to do other things that made them notable. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 01:00, 1 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete Not defining to enough of these people to be worth categorizing by.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 22:52, 5 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete -- Being an office holder in a student society will rarely be defining. If kept, rename to include "Trinity College Dublin".
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:32, 6 April 2014 (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:Ex-Presidents of India
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:speedy mergeWP:G7 (see my talk page). –
FayenaticLondon 20:47, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Upmerge. This was newly split by an inexperienced editor. We do not split current and former office-holders within the many sub-cats of
Category:Office-holders. –
FayenaticLondon 13:25, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Upmerge per nom.
Oculi (
talk) 15:44, 30 March 2014 (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:George Temple Poole buildings
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:speedy rename. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 21:32, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Support For future reference, this could have been handled more simply at
WP:SPEEDY, because of the typo, its difference from the main article (if any) and because it's now empty.
Shawn in Montreal (
talk) 16:37, 30 March 2014 (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:Cultural heritage of Indonesia
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:withdrawn. –
FayenaticLondon 13:39, 4 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Is there a possibility for expansion? In other words, does Indonesia have cultural heritage not formally recognized as "
cultural properties and, just as importantly, can we categorize them objectively? -- Black Falcon(
talk) 21:29, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
You are right, there is a category for World Heritage Sites in Indonesia. I have now put it into this one, and withdraw the nomination. –
FayenaticLondon 19:37, 1 April 2014 (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:Kronos-Saturn
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 for now; if a user wants to propose splitting the new category, feel free to do so in a new nomination. Given that the article is at
Cronus, there's not really a good reason to have the category use the "Kronos" spelling.
Good Ol’factory(talk) 00:31, 10 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: The article is at
Cronus; not keen on the format but can't think of anything better.
Tim! (
talk) 07:37, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Rename, or split, to
Category:Cronus or
Category:Saturn (mythology). This category contains a mix of articles related to the Greek god
Cronus, the Roman god
Saturn, and the planet
Saturn in mythology. The combined name makes me think of some type of mythological or comic-book amalgamation. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 23:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep -- If anything it is the article that should be renamed. The lead says "Cronus or Kronos". This is about a Greek God, whose name begins with a K - kappa. It is a question of whether that letter is transliterated as C or K. Cronus is a latinisation of the name, with the Latin male ending -us rather than the Greek one of -os (both second declension singular). Greek and Roman gods with similar attributes were frequently identified with each other, including the Greek Zeus with the Roman Jupiter, so that I see no objection to a joint category.
Cronos is currently a dabpage.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:41, 6 April 2014 (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:Goldman Environmental Prize winners
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.
This award goes to "grassroots environmental activists" from Africa, Asia, Europe, Islands and Island Nations, North America, and South and Central America. Each receives a whopping US$150,000 per recipient. That's pretty life-changing money for a grassroots activist in, say, the developing world. It's awarded by an international journey. Are we sure this isn't a defining characteristic for honourees, in line with
WP:OC/AWARD?
Shawn in Montreal (
talk) 16:42, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
That amount of money may be life-changing for some people, but in other cases (
example) having received the award isn't even (currently) mentioned in the article.
DexDor (
talk) 19:33, 30 March 2014 (UTC)reply
I'm not confident enough on this one to record a !vote either way. What's more, I'm sure in my early days here I'd created an awards cat or two that might not pass muster. But not recently, I assure you.
Shawn in Montreal (
talk) 17:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete This award is not defining in general to the recipients. There is a very high threshold for award categories, and this does not pass it.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 22:14, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete -- another unnecessary award winners category.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:42, 6 April 2014 (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:Indianapolis Prize winners
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 first-place unrestricted cash prize of US$250,000, possibly
the highest of any conservation award, makes the Indianapolis Prize a prestigious and desirable award. However, even after working on the article (
diff), I can't say for sure that receiving the prize is
defining; typically, prize winners are already well-known for their other work. I think that this might just pass the threshold for being a
defining characteristic, but it is difficult to evaluate due to the fact that the award is only a few years old. -- Black Falcon(
talk) 21:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete This award is not defining enough of its recipients to be worth categorizing by.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 22:14, 31 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete -- another unnecessary award winners category.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:42, 6 April 2014 (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:Albanian nationalism
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.
reverse merge per facts stated by Black Falcon.
Hmains (
talk) 03:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC)reply
That essentially what I wanted also, I should have made that more clear.
Charles Essie (
talk) 17:17, 1 April 2014 (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.