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: This is a category that doesn't seem to serve a purpose, or even know its purpose. If it is intended for work made of silver we already have
Category:Silversmithing and
Category:Silver objects. If it is intended for companies or sites that produce silver (suggested by its parent categories) there is only one article in the category that fits the bill in any way, which is a mine therefore should be in
Category:Silver mining. The articles in the category are already in other suitable silver-related categories.
Sionk (
talk) 22:13, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete. Distinction between historic organisations and, presumably, non-historic, does not work.
Rathfelder (
talk) 09:54, 8 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete All are in other silver cats, where many of the contents are just as "historic".
Johnbod (
talk) 21:07, 10 July 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:Historical people of Izmir
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 per actual content of the category, this is about people from
Smyrna. Besides we hardly have any other "Historical people" categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:03, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom These are all people from
Smyrna.
Dimadick (
talk) 12:07, 8 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Support or better rename
Category:People from Smyrna, as I am not sure that the proposed target is a correct demonym. The fact that this is for historical people of the Greek city, not those of the present Turkish Izmir can be explained in a headnote. The Greek population of Asia Minor was exchanged with the Muslim population of Greece in the 1920s.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:28, 15 July 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:Historical people of Istanbul
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:Merge.
Timrollpickering 00:51, 21 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:upmerge, a container category with only two subcategories is not helpful for easy navigation. Besides we hardly have any other "Historical people" categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:59, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Merge per nom Unclear distinction.
Dimadick (
talk) 12:08, 8 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Merge we don't split "people from" categories into dead vs. alive.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:14, 11 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Support -- The effect is that who subcats will become subcats of Istanbul ones. This is not a living/dead split, but one related to the successive names of the city.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:31, 15 July 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:Square roots
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: All (real and complex) numbers are square roots of other numbers, thus all articles on numbers belong in this category, making this category completely redundant. –
Deacon Vorbis (
carbon •
videos) 20:37, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment - the category is for numbers notable for being square roots. 2 is indeed the square root of 4 but an article on 2 is unlikely to highlight this fact. An article on the imaginary number i which didn't mention (-1)^(1/2) would be seriously defective.
Oculi (
talk) 20:45, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment/Question: What about
Category:Square root? The title would indicate the category is a list of articles related to a topic, rather than a list of square roots.
Hyacinth (
talk) 21:21, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment presumably the mathematical concept is sufficiently notable but the category should only contain articles on that concept, not individual numbers - all of which are square roots of something.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:16, 11 July 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.
Nominator's rationale: Over-specific category; broadening the definition of this category a bit will make it much more useful. Techology and sexuality is a much wider topic than just computers and sexuality, going back to before the invention of computers. Consider, for example,
call girls, made possible by the telephone, or the
vibrator and
electrosex, which both pre-date the invention of the computer. "Computers" is much too specific; more or less any modern technology involves computers, but is not necessarily a "computer technology". For example, the
Internet is primarily a communications technology, even though it is implemented using computers, in much the same way that newspapers are primarily a communications technology, not a wood or pigment technology, although they are implemented using both. The same goes for telephony, cars, navigation, and so on: all now use computers, but are not "computer technologies". --
The Anome (
talk) 11:53, 6 July 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:Ancient Spartan women athletes
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 associated with the Bengal Renaissance
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 per
WP:NONDEF and
WP:OCASSOC, hardly any of the articles in this category even mentions "Bengal Renaissance".
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:01, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep, probably trim. It would be ridiculous to just delete this, but with 130 members, it might be too large. The Bengal Renaissance navbox thing has about 50 names. Several of these mention eg the
Young Bengal group, which it is legitimate to count as part of the Bengal Renaissance.
Johnbod (
talk) 21:10, 10 July 2018 (UTC)reply
I can see room for a new
Category:Young Bengal leaders. But as far as the 50 articles in the navbox concerned, most of these articles do not mention "Bengal Renaissance" except in the navbox. That does not make it defining.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:39, 15 July 2018 (UTC)reply
This makes no sense - the two things are different, which is why they have two articles. So why restrict the category to those from the smaller part? And the Indian and Bangladesh projects should be informed, rather than just Europeans with no knowledge of the area meddling in it! Another area of the BR was
Brahmoism (but not plain
Brahmo), and its later splinter groups, which many articles mention. You can be sure not every bio in the "Italian Renaissance" tree includes those words.
Johnbod (
talk) 21:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Very few people in this category are defined as a Brahmoist. Some are of a Brahmoist family but that does not count as a defining characteristic if they were not active in Brahmoism themself. The Indian and Bangladesh projects are informed by the project tags on the category talk page.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 19:34, 19 July 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:People associated with the Australian Labor Party
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 merely being "associated" with something is almost always non-defining. If the party has members as the Communist Party of the Soviet Union did, then perhaps membership is defining, but it's not clear that this is what is being categorized here. Being associated with a political party, such as saying you support it or campaign for it or such is much like being associated with a sports team by supporting it or watching/attending its games. Not meaningful.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:19, 11 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete Either they are politicians (including party officials) or they are not worth categorising.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:39, 15 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Reorganise somehow This seems to be a catch-all for ALP people not easily categorised elsewhere, mostly people notable in other fields who were unsuccessful candidates for the party, various party officials & staffers, a handful of intellectuals who may have fought the column war for the party plus a few councillors and some people whose article says nothing about Labor connections. Candidates and party officials have never been terribly satisfactorily categorised - maybe we should clearly merge them to
Category:Australian Labor Party politicians as a firm precedent?
Timrollpickering 08:42, 21 July 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:People associated with the anti-austerity movement
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, these are people associated with an anti-austerity movement in different countries, they do not have a relationship with each other.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:54, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
That would not solve the problem that the articles of this category are very unrelated to each other.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 16:09, 7 July 2018 (UTC)reply
rename and prune to
Category:Anti-austerity activists. One person certainly fitted this. Another was an economist, who was probably not an "activist". I note this has a lot of redirects in it.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:43, 15 July 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:People associated with Anonymous
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 and purge per
WP:OCASSOC, this is currently a hodgepodge category of people associated with Anonymous in very different ways.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:45, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:OCASSOC and similar to my comments to the Labor Party above. "Activists" are hardly better. Look at our article "activism" which defines it as: "efforts to promote, impede, or direct social, political, economic, or environmental reform or stasis with the desire to make improvements in society. Forms of activism range from writing letters to newspapers or to politicians, political campaigning, economic activism such as boycotts or preferentially patronizing businesses, rallies, street marches, strikes, sit-ins, and hunger strikes." So anyone who writes to a newspaper or politician or campaigns could be an "activist". Malarkey.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:22, 11 July 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:Song articles with TOCcolors-class lyrics section
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:Delete.
Timrollpickering 08:43, 21 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Created and populated by a suspected sockpuppet, not a category of song articles by quality as stated, but rather mostly trivial. The user has been brought up at ANI and is currently the subject of an SPI. - CHAMPION(
talk) (
contributions) (
logs) 00:35, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete – Regardless of the editor's background and behaviour, this category doesn't serve any useful purpose. This was demonstrated when it was created uncategorised, and then placed, inappropriately, in
Category:Song articles by quality. --
Michael Bednarek (
talk) 01:37, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
On second thoughts, the category provides a useful list of all articles where an abominable colour scheme, which has nothing to with "toccolours", is used. So maybe it should be kept until the underlying problem has been removed and the category is empty. --
Michael Bednarek (
talk) 02:06, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete after emptying: most articles do look pretty abominable at present, but cleaning up won't be as easy as rolling back a single user's edits, as could be done at
La Marseillaise;
Indonesia Raya's abominableness goes back to a different editor in Oct 2015, and San Marino's
Inno Nazionale della Repubblica actually looks fine to me.
Sparafucil (
talk) 03:17, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete as uninformative/trivial as a cat. While I can understand the temptation to 'keep it until the underlying problem has been removed', this would only add to the backlog of clean-ups. Editors are welcome to clean up class at any point, and
WP:ILIKEIT isn't an argument for using visually distracting use of styles in the first instance. There are some horrible examples flouting
WP:DTT, and the idea is that we
WP:FIXIT as we find it. Let's not keep categories in order to identify unruly usage of article formatting. Badly presented articles are going to happen/already exist without such monitoring systems and wish lists. Clean the article up as you encounter it. --
Iryna Harpy (
talk) 19:26, 6 July 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.
Nominator's rationale: This is a category that doesn't seem to serve a purpose, or even know its purpose. If it is intended for work made of silver we already have
Category:Silversmithing and
Category:Silver objects. If it is intended for companies or sites that produce silver (suggested by its parent categories) there is only one article in the category that fits the bill in any way, which is a mine therefore should be in
Category:Silver mining. The articles in the category are already in other suitable silver-related categories.
Sionk (
talk) 22:13, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete. Distinction between historic organisations and, presumably, non-historic, does not work.
Rathfelder (
talk) 09:54, 8 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete All are in other silver cats, where many of the contents are just as "historic".
Johnbod (
talk) 21:07, 10 July 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:Historical people of Izmir
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 per actual content of the category, this is about people from
Smyrna. Besides we hardly have any other "Historical people" categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:03, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom These are all people from
Smyrna.
Dimadick (
talk) 12:07, 8 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Support or better rename
Category:People from Smyrna, as I am not sure that the proposed target is a correct demonym. The fact that this is for historical people of the Greek city, not those of the present Turkish Izmir can be explained in a headnote. The Greek population of Asia Minor was exchanged with the Muslim population of Greece in the 1920s.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:28, 15 July 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:Historical people of Istanbul
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:Merge.
Timrollpickering 00:51, 21 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:upmerge, a container category with only two subcategories is not helpful for easy navigation. Besides we hardly have any other "Historical people" categories.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:59, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Merge per nom Unclear distinction.
Dimadick (
talk) 12:08, 8 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Merge we don't split "people from" categories into dead vs. alive.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:14, 11 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Support -- The effect is that who subcats will become subcats of Istanbul ones. This is not a living/dead split, but one related to the successive names of the city.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:31, 15 July 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:Square roots
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: All (real and complex) numbers are square roots of other numbers, thus all articles on numbers belong in this category, making this category completely redundant. –
Deacon Vorbis (
carbon •
videos) 20:37, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment - the category is for numbers notable for being square roots. 2 is indeed the square root of 4 but an article on 2 is unlikely to highlight this fact. An article on the imaginary number i which didn't mention (-1)^(1/2) would be seriously defective.
Oculi (
talk) 20:45, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment/Question: What about
Category:Square root? The title would indicate the category is a list of articles related to a topic, rather than a list of square roots.
Hyacinth (
talk) 21:21, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Comment presumably the mathematical concept is sufficiently notable but the category should only contain articles on that concept, not individual numbers - all of which are square roots of something.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:16, 11 July 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.
Nominator's rationale: Over-specific category; broadening the definition of this category a bit will make it much more useful. Techology and sexuality is a much wider topic than just computers and sexuality, going back to before the invention of computers. Consider, for example,
call girls, made possible by the telephone, or the
vibrator and
electrosex, which both pre-date the invention of the computer. "Computers" is much too specific; more or less any modern technology involves computers, but is not necessarily a "computer technology". For example, the
Internet is primarily a communications technology, even though it is implemented using computers, in much the same way that newspapers are primarily a communications technology, not a wood or pigment technology, although they are implemented using both. The same goes for telephony, cars, navigation, and so on: all now use computers, but are not "computer technologies". --
The Anome (
talk) 11:53, 6 July 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:Ancient Spartan women athletes
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 associated with the Bengal Renaissance
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 per
WP:NONDEF and
WP:OCASSOC, hardly any of the articles in this category even mentions "Bengal Renaissance".
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:01, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep, probably trim. It would be ridiculous to just delete this, but with 130 members, it might be too large. The Bengal Renaissance navbox thing has about 50 names. Several of these mention eg the
Young Bengal group, which it is legitimate to count as part of the Bengal Renaissance.
Johnbod (
talk) 21:10, 10 July 2018 (UTC)reply
I can see room for a new
Category:Young Bengal leaders. But as far as the 50 articles in the navbox concerned, most of these articles do not mention "Bengal Renaissance" except in the navbox. That does not make it defining.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:39, 15 July 2018 (UTC)reply
This makes no sense - the two things are different, which is why they have two articles. So why restrict the category to those from the smaller part? And the Indian and Bangladesh projects should be informed, rather than just Europeans with no knowledge of the area meddling in it! Another area of the BR was
Brahmoism (but not plain
Brahmo), and its later splinter groups, which many articles mention. You can be sure not every bio in the "Italian Renaissance" tree includes those words.
Johnbod (
talk) 21:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Very few people in this category are defined as a Brahmoist. Some are of a Brahmoist family but that does not count as a defining characteristic if they were not active in Brahmoism themself. The Indian and Bangladesh projects are informed by the project tags on the category talk page.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 19:34, 19 July 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:People associated with the Australian Labor Party
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 merely being "associated" with something is almost always non-defining. If the party has members as the Communist Party of the Soviet Union did, then perhaps membership is defining, but it's not clear that this is what is being categorized here. Being associated with a political party, such as saying you support it or campaign for it or such is much like being associated with a sports team by supporting it or watching/attending its games. Not meaningful.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:19, 11 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete Either they are politicians (including party officials) or they are not worth categorising.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:39, 15 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Reorganise somehow This seems to be a catch-all for ALP people not easily categorised elsewhere, mostly people notable in other fields who were unsuccessful candidates for the party, various party officials & staffers, a handful of intellectuals who may have fought the column war for the party plus a few councillors and some people whose article says nothing about Labor connections. Candidates and party officials have never been terribly satisfactorily categorised - maybe we should clearly merge them to
Category:Australian Labor Party politicians as a firm precedent?
Timrollpickering 08:42, 21 July 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:People associated with the anti-austerity movement
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, these are people associated with an anti-austerity movement in different countries, they do not have a relationship with each other.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:54, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
That would not solve the problem that the articles of this category are very unrelated to each other.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 16:09, 7 July 2018 (UTC)reply
rename and prune to
Category:Anti-austerity activists. One person certainly fitted this. Another was an economist, who was probably not an "activist". I note this has a lot of redirects in it.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 17:43, 15 July 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:People associated with Anonymous
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 and purge per
WP:OCASSOC, this is currently a hodgepodge category of people associated with Anonymous in very different ways.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 05:45, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:OCASSOC and similar to my comments to the Labor Party above. "Activists" are hardly better. Look at our article "activism" which defines it as: "efforts to promote, impede, or direct social, political, economic, or environmental reform or stasis with the desire to make improvements in society. Forms of activism range from writing letters to newspapers or to politicians, political campaigning, economic activism such as boycotts or preferentially patronizing businesses, rallies, street marches, strikes, sit-ins, and hunger strikes." So anyone who writes to a newspaper or politician or campaigns could be an "activist". Malarkey.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk) 17:22, 11 July 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:Song articles with TOCcolors-class lyrics section
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:Delete.
Timrollpickering 08:43, 21 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Created and populated by a suspected sockpuppet, not a category of song articles by quality as stated, but rather mostly trivial. The user has been brought up at ANI and is currently the subject of an SPI. - CHAMPION(
talk) (
contributions) (
logs) 00:35, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete – Regardless of the editor's background and behaviour, this category doesn't serve any useful purpose. This was demonstrated when it was created uncategorised, and then placed, inappropriately, in
Category:Song articles by quality. --
Michael Bednarek (
talk) 01:37, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
On second thoughts, the category provides a useful list of all articles where an abominable colour scheme, which has nothing to with "toccolours", is used. So maybe it should be kept until the underlying problem has been removed and the category is empty. --
Michael Bednarek (
talk) 02:06, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete after emptying: most articles do look pretty abominable at present, but cleaning up won't be as easy as rolling back a single user's edits, as could be done at
La Marseillaise;
Indonesia Raya's abominableness goes back to a different editor in Oct 2015, and San Marino's
Inno Nazionale della Repubblica actually looks fine to me.
Sparafucil (
talk) 03:17, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete as uninformative/trivial as a cat. While I can understand the temptation to 'keep it until the underlying problem has been removed', this would only add to the backlog of clean-ups. Editors are welcome to clean up class at any point, and
WP:ILIKEIT isn't an argument for using visually distracting use of styles in the first instance. There are some horrible examples flouting
WP:DTT, and the idea is that we
WP:FIXIT as we find it. Let's not keep categories in order to identify unruly usage of article formatting. Badly presented articles are going to happen/already exist without such monitoring systems and wish lists. Clean the article up as you encounter it. --
Iryna Harpy (
talk) 19:26, 6 July 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.