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.
I've not removed anything from the category - I've simply added presenter to the article, Inregards to the "technically empty" thing... well we'll have to agree to disagree but I personally still think the category is pointless for one article, Cheers, –
Davey2010Talk22:46, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep (as creator). I dunnno why I didn't populate this properly when I created it, but 5 minutes work now got it up to 10 articles. Note that
WP:SMALLCAT does not apply to categories which have realistic potential for growth. It's a pity that the nominator @
Davey2010 didn't take 60 seconds to see whether this one had realistic potential for growth. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
22:44, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
BrownHairedGirl - Incase it's not apparently obvious I have no knowledge at all with categories so you not doing whatever it is you done to it is not my problem, If you don't want editors nominating your creations in good faith then how about double-checking these things before making them live!, Withdrawn anyway. –
Davey2010Talk22:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
V odd, Davey2010. If you have no knowledge at all with categories and don't want to spend a few minutes reading up on them, why launch straight into a deletion nomination? Good faith involves a bit of
WP:BEFORE. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
23:03, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Nothing odd about it, "If you have no knowledge at all with categories and don't want to spend a few minutes reading up on them, why launch straight into a deletion nomination? The only thing that's very odd is you not viewing your creations AFTER you've created them, Maybe because I didn't realise there was an error with it ?" ... Maybe I took the category at face value as anyone would have done?, I don't work with cats so have no interest in doing BEFORE and all that - I saw one entry and figured CFD was obviously for the best, As I said if you don't want your stuff nominated then make sure they're all okay beforehand, Have a great day. –
Davey2010Talk23:10, 11 January 2018 (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:Argentine governors
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.
Rename per nom, mainly because we need to make clear this is limited to those serving as governors of provinces of Argentina, not colonial governors over Argentina, and not Argentines who may have served as governors elsewhere. The proper order can be finalized in a general discussion on the whole category tree, but this is clearly not in compliance as it is currently formulated.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
15:12, 9 February 2018 (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:Alela Diane
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: Unnecessary eponymous category per
WP:OCEPON. Only album articles which are appropriately categorized without need of this as a parent. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me20:33, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete. As always, a musician does not automatically get an eponymous category just because she has a
WP:BLP and an "albums by" category — eponymous categories only get created for people who have a lot of spinoff content that needs person-related categorization beyond the standard categorization schemes that every musician already has. For example,
Category:Madonna (entertainer) has eight subcategories, not just one for her albums, and 31 other articles besides her BLP that are related to her in ways that wouldn't fit any of the standard categories.
Bearcat (
talk)
18:27, 13 January 2018 (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:Youth organizations by date of disestablishment
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: One entry - a subcategory. Hard to see why we would want to categorise Youth organizations by date of disestablishment.
Rathfelder (
talk)
20:07, 11 January 2018 (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:Youth organizations disestablished in the 1960s
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:Growth 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.
Comment - growth media include microbiological media, but the reverse is not true; growth media include media for sustaining mammalian cells lines, for example, that do not fall under microbiological media. —
soupvector (
talk)
05:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Support. Some of the growth media listed are agars used for isolating organisms, not supporting growth. The category is therefore at least misnamed. Not sure I agree with
soupvector, that cell lines are not "microbiological". If there are members in
Category:Microbiological media are are specifically for supporting tissue growth (or stasis) as opposed to growth of single cells, then they should be moved out to a new category. --
SmokeyJoe (
talk)
02:22, 18 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose While some cell lines might be used for some microbiological applications, many others are used for cell biology - so "microbiological" would not be inclusive of "cell lines" (they simply overlap);
RPMI is one example of this (I have used this in my lab almost exclusively for growing human lymphocytes - not for
microbiology). Perhaps
SmokeyJoe could point out (or just fix) those listed pages that are not growth media (and therefore should have the "growth media" category link removed); I do see some agars that are supplemented with nutrients (making them both growth media and microbiological media). —
soupvector (
talk)
02:54, 18 January 2018 (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:Paintings depicting Daniel
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.
Merge per nom the Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Jonah categories. Oppose merging the Daniel categoryDaniel is not considered a prophet in
Judaism, and the
Book of Daniel is excluded from the prophetic books. The relevant article specifically calls attention to the exclusion.
Dimadick (
talk)
09:47, 13 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Support last three (unless we can get at least 5 articles), but Daniel is different. (1) Judaism places the book in writings (not prophets). (2) between Daniel in the Lions Den; the three children in the firey furnace and perhaps apocryhal additions such as Susannah, there is probably enough for
Category:Paintings depicting the Book of Daniel.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
18:10, 14 January 2018 (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:Civic youth organizations
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: Poorly defined. Most of the entries related to programs run by the American Legion which didn't appear to be organisations at all and I've put them in that category. The distinction between this and Political youth organizations seems a bit subjective
Rathfelder (
talk)
11:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
IIRC I had created this to host Otpor and similar. These were NGOs that were not political as in party-affiliated, just generally civic-minded. If you have to merge it somewhere, I suppose the political youth organisations category is a better destination than the generic one. --
Joy [shallot] (
talk)
17:15, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Happy to disperse the articles if we agree that civic doesnt work. Arguably large numbers of youth and child organisations are civic minded.
Rathfelder (
talk)
20:10, 11 January 2018 (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:Recent years
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 I created this category as part of an attempt to reform the walled garden of recent years articles. It now appears that instead of being reformed,
WP:RY just isn’t a thing anymore, and that is probably fo the best. That being the case this category is no longer needed as it’s only purpose was to identify what articles fell under the scope of that now non-existent guideline.
Beeblebrox (
talk)
22:16, 11 January 2018 (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:Cloverfield films
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.
Yes, I did empty the category before I made the deletion request... sorry if that wasn't the proper procedure. It couldn't be deleted simply by doing so because someone had actually edited the category page. It had 3 elements:
Cloverfield,
10 Cloverfield Lane,
God Particle (film)—and had been recently created (yesterday, I think) so my impetus was to nip it in the bud as a
WP:SMALLCAT. Are we supposed to propose it for deletion first? —
Joeyconnick (
talk)
19:20, 11 January 2018 (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.
I've not removed anything from the category - I've simply added presenter to the article, Inregards to the "technically empty" thing... well we'll have to agree to disagree but I personally still think the category is pointless for one article, Cheers, –
Davey2010Talk22:46, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep (as creator). I dunnno why I didn't populate this properly when I created it, but 5 minutes work now got it up to 10 articles. Note that
WP:SMALLCAT does not apply to categories which have realistic potential for growth. It's a pity that the nominator @
Davey2010 didn't take 60 seconds to see whether this one had realistic potential for growth. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
22:44, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
BrownHairedGirl - Incase it's not apparently obvious I have no knowledge at all with categories so you not doing whatever it is you done to it is not my problem, If you don't want editors nominating your creations in good faith then how about double-checking these things before making them live!, Withdrawn anyway. –
Davey2010Talk22:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
V odd, Davey2010. If you have no knowledge at all with categories and don't want to spend a few minutes reading up on them, why launch straight into a deletion nomination? Good faith involves a bit of
WP:BEFORE. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
23:03, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Nothing odd about it, "If you have no knowledge at all with categories and don't want to spend a few minutes reading up on them, why launch straight into a deletion nomination? The only thing that's very odd is you not viewing your creations AFTER you've created them, Maybe because I didn't realise there was an error with it ?" ... Maybe I took the category at face value as anyone would have done?, I don't work with cats so have no interest in doing BEFORE and all that - I saw one entry and figured CFD was obviously for the best, As I said if you don't want your stuff nominated then make sure they're all okay beforehand, Have a great day. –
Davey2010Talk23:10, 11 January 2018 (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:Argentine governors
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.
Rename per nom, mainly because we need to make clear this is limited to those serving as governors of provinces of Argentina, not colonial governors over Argentina, and not Argentines who may have served as governors elsewhere. The proper order can be finalized in a general discussion on the whole category tree, but this is clearly not in compliance as it is currently formulated.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
15:12, 9 February 2018 (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:Alela Diane
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: Unnecessary eponymous category per
WP:OCEPON. Only album articles which are appropriately categorized without need of this as a parent. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me20:33, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete. As always, a musician does not automatically get an eponymous category just because she has a
WP:BLP and an "albums by" category — eponymous categories only get created for people who have a lot of spinoff content that needs person-related categorization beyond the standard categorization schemes that every musician already has. For example,
Category:Madonna (entertainer) has eight subcategories, not just one for her albums, and 31 other articles besides her BLP that are related to her in ways that wouldn't fit any of the standard categories.
Bearcat (
talk)
18:27, 13 January 2018 (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:Youth organizations by date of disestablishment
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: One entry - a subcategory. Hard to see why we would want to categorise Youth organizations by date of disestablishment.
Rathfelder (
talk)
20:07, 11 January 2018 (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:Youth organizations disestablished in the 1960s
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:Growth 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.
Comment - growth media include microbiological media, but the reverse is not true; growth media include media for sustaining mammalian cells lines, for example, that do not fall under microbiological media. —
soupvector (
talk)
05:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Support. Some of the growth media listed are agars used for isolating organisms, not supporting growth. The category is therefore at least misnamed. Not sure I agree with
soupvector, that cell lines are not "microbiological". If there are members in
Category:Microbiological media are are specifically for supporting tissue growth (or stasis) as opposed to growth of single cells, then they should be moved out to a new category. --
SmokeyJoe (
talk)
02:22, 18 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose While some cell lines might be used for some microbiological applications, many others are used for cell biology - so "microbiological" would not be inclusive of "cell lines" (they simply overlap);
RPMI is one example of this (I have used this in my lab almost exclusively for growing human lymphocytes - not for
microbiology). Perhaps
SmokeyJoe could point out (or just fix) those listed pages that are not growth media (and therefore should have the "growth media" category link removed); I do see some agars that are supplemented with nutrients (making them both growth media and microbiological media). —
soupvector (
talk)
02:54, 18 January 2018 (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:Paintings depicting Daniel
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.
Merge per nom the Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Jonah categories. Oppose merging the Daniel categoryDaniel is not considered a prophet in
Judaism, and the
Book of Daniel is excluded from the prophetic books. The relevant article specifically calls attention to the exclusion.
Dimadick (
talk)
09:47, 13 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Support last three (unless we can get at least 5 articles), but Daniel is different. (1) Judaism places the book in writings (not prophets). (2) between Daniel in the Lions Den; the three children in the firey furnace and perhaps apocryhal additions such as Susannah, there is probably enough for
Category:Paintings depicting the Book of Daniel.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
18:10, 14 January 2018 (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:Civic youth organizations
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: Poorly defined. Most of the entries related to programs run by the American Legion which didn't appear to be organisations at all and I've put them in that category. The distinction between this and Political youth organizations seems a bit subjective
Rathfelder (
talk)
11:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
IIRC I had created this to host Otpor and similar. These were NGOs that were not political as in party-affiliated, just generally civic-minded. If you have to merge it somewhere, I suppose the political youth organisations category is a better destination than the generic one. --
Joy [shallot] (
talk)
17:15, 11 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Happy to disperse the articles if we agree that civic doesnt work. Arguably large numbers of youth and child organisations are civic minded.
Rathfelder (
talk)
20:10, 11 January 2018 (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:Recent years
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 I created this category as part of an attempt to reform the walled garden of recent years articles. It now appears that instead of being reformed,
WP:RY just isn’t a thing anymore, and that is probably fo the best. That being the case this category is no longer needed as it’s only purpose was to identify what articles fell under the scope of that now non-existent guideline.
Beeblebrox (
talk)
22:16, 11 January 2018 (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:Cloverfield films
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.
Yes, I did empty the category before I made the deletion request... sorry if that wasn't the proper procedure. It couldn't be deleted simply by doing so because someone had actually edited the category page. It had 3 elements:
Cloverfield,
10 Cloverfield Lane,
God Particle (film)—and had been recently created (yesterday, I think) so my impetus was to nip it in the bud as a
WP:SMALLCAT. Are we supposed to propose it for deletion first? —
Joeyconnick (
talk)
19:20, 11 January 2018 (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.