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:Anna Jane Vardill
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:WP:SMALLCAT which exists solely to contain a single image file of a page from a book. Furthermore, the category namer
Anna Jane Vardill is not even the primary author of the book in question -- it simply included one of her short stories as a "bonus" feature separate from the book's title-giving content, so she isn't a
defining characteristic of the file, when it isn't even categorized for the book's main author. And since all she has otherwise is her main biographical article, there's nothing else to be filed here in order to repurpose it as a useful or navigation-aiding category.
Bearcat (
talk)
19:48, 20 November 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:Twin-engined airplanes with fixed landing gear
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: A cat that mixes two different themes is not an aid to navigation or reading, there is no relationship between engine number and the type of landing gear. Bit like picking two random features and creating a category. Engine type already has a family of cats and the landing gear type is not really defining or related.
MilborneOne (
talk)
16:51, 20 November 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:Biogeochemical cycle
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, there are some 8 more articles in this category that are not about a particular cycle. Nominator should indicate what should happen to those articles if this category would be renamed.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:23, 20 November 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:English supercentenarians
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Upmerge per nom. These used to make sense, because we used to treat reaching the age of 100 as an "inherent" notability claim that entitled a person to keep a Wikipedia article — but that's since been deprecated as not an automatic notability guarantee anymore, with the result that a lot of the articles that used to be subcatted here are now gone. So nominator is correct that we really don't need to hold on to the subcategories; with two categories completely emptied and one more down to just one entry, "British" is the only level we really need here anymore.
Bearcat (
talk)
19:51, 20 November 2018 (UTC)reply
That was "reaching the age of 110", not 100, but indeed things are evolving: as the worldwide count of
supercentenarians has probably surpassed a thousand, we keep most people in lists by country. Individual articles only cover people with another reason to be notable beside their advanced age. —
JFGtalk04:40, 21 November 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.
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:Anna Jane Vardill
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:WP:SMALLCAT which exists solely to contain a single image file of a page from a book. Furthermore, the category namer
Anna Jane Vardill is not even the primary author of the book in question -- it simply included one of her short stories as a "bonus" feature separate from the book's title-giving content, so she isn't a
defining characteristic of the file, when it isn't even categorized for the book's main author. And since all she has otherwise is her main biographical article, there's nothing else to be filed here in order to repurpose it as a useful or navigation-aiding category.
Bearcat (
talk)
19:48, 20 November 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:Twin-engined airplanes with fixed landing gear
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: A cat that mixes two different themes is not an aid to navigation or reading, there is no relationship between engine number and the type of landing gear. Bit like picking two random features and creating a category. Engine type already has a family of cats and the landing gear type is not really defining or related.
MilborneOne (
talk)
16:51, 20 November 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:Biogeochemical cycle
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, there are some 8 more articles in this category that are not about a particular cycle. Nominator should indicate what should happen to those articles if this category would be renamed.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:23, 20 November 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:English supercentenarians
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Upmerge per nom. These used to make sense, because we used to treat reaching the age of 100 as an "inherent" notability claim that entitled a person to keep a Wikipedia article — but that's since been deprecated as not an automatic notability guarantee anymore, with the result that a lot of the articles that used to be subcatted here are now gone. So nominator is correct that we really don't need to hold on to the subcategories; with two categories completely emptied and one more down to just one entry, "British" is the only level we really need here anymore.
Bearcat (
talk)
19:51, 20 November 2018 (UTC)reply
That was "reaching the age of 110", not 100, but indeed things are evolving: as the worldwide count of
supercentenarians has probably surpassed a thousand, we keep most people in lists by country. Individual articles only cover people with another reason to be notable beside their advanced age. —
JFGtalk04:40, 21 November 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.