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 to reduce ambiguity. Ecclesiastical basilicas is a rare term, perhaps even a made-up term. The main article is at
Basilica and this category apparently refers to the third meaning of Basilica according to the numbering in the lead of the article. So
Category:Basilicas (disambiguator) is the clearest form.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:50, 20 February 2019 (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:Municipalities of the Republic of Macedonia
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 - the contents should be moved back as this is already at cfd. Moreover Johndavies837 should be rebuked for emptying a category undergoing cfd.
Oculi (
talk)
16:41, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
I have reverted the out-of-process emptying of the category by @
Johndavies837.
Sadly, @
Johndavies837's claim that they didn't realise the category was at CFD is a completely implausible. John could not have selected the category's contents for editing without visiting the category page, where there was a prominent CFD notice saying "This category is being considered for renaming to Category:Municipalities of North Macedonia". That same notice will have been visible to John when he made several edits to the category page, which I have also reverted. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
17:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Thank you for reverting my changes,
BrownHairedGirl. I had a bunch of Macedonia tabs open and, while switching through them, I saw a list that needed to be updated and went to work. I saw the CfD notice while doing that but it confused me because the nomination is for "Category:Republic of Macedonia", not "Category:Municipalities of the Republic of Macedonia". I thought the nomination was for a different category. I should have been more careful before making a large number of changes. Apologies. I haven't done a lot of editing yet. I realized my error when I was finished. But I have no stake in what the name ends up being and the CfD is overwhelmingly in favor of a name change.
Johndavies837 (
talk)
20:00, 20 February 2019 (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.
Association football in Ireland
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.
"Football" is an ambiguous term Ireland, because
Gaelic football is also a popular sport here; by some measures, Gaelic football is twice as popular as association football in Ireland . (See e.g. Fig 5.4 on page 45 of the 2003 ESRI report:
"The Social Significance of Sport" 34% of people had attended attend a Gaelic football matches in the previous 12 months, vs 16% attending a soccer match). --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
14:56, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose Gaelic football is organised on an All-Ireland basis while association football is divided into two jurisdictions (RoI and NI). Very few Gaelic football articles/categories would even use the term "Republic of Ireland" because of this. Gaelic football is played only in Ireland at a serious level and is virtually unknown about even in neighbouring England. There is no serious need to disambiguate here. In over 15 years editing Wikipedia, I've never found a single Gaelic football article/category mistakenly place in a "Republic of Ireland football" category or vice versa. Their is now accurate way to determine which code is more popular. The report BHG cites is over a decade old and does not take into account the massive TV audience in Ireland that watches the Premier League.
DjlnDjln (
talk)
18:00, 23 February 2019 (UTC)reply
The head category is
Category:Association football in Ireland, and it is a long-standing principle of en.wp categories that the category names should be consistent.
@
BrownHairedGirl: I would support amending the names of some of these categories. Basically the ones without a year or season in their title. There is no need to disambiguate a category when there is no other similar named category in existence. Seasonal and yearly categories for Gaelic football do not have "Irish", "Republic of Ireland" or "Northern Ireland" in their titles because Gaelic football is only played in Ireland and on All Ireland basis. Changing all these category names is a bit pointless. Many of the alternative titles you propose are long winded, add a layer of confusion and are completely unnecessary.
DjlnDjln (
talk)
14:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Djln, the names used for association football are a
WP:ENGVAR issue.
But within each country, the same considerations apply, so the policy is that we apply the principle of
WP:CONSISTENCY.
I am not aware of any other country where this policy is breached by using one name is used for the national parent categories, and a different name for the subcats. Are you?
We can have separate discussion about inconsistencies in the Gaelic football categories, if you or anyone else wants to nominate them. But this discusison is about the association football categories. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
15:04, 25 February 2019 (UTC)reply
WP:Consensus#Determining_consensus: "Consensus is ascertained by the quality of the arguments given on the various sides of an issue, as viewed through the lens of Wikipedia policy.".
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.
Secretaries of State (UK)
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.
Leaning towards oppose. The current titles are unambiguous and relatively concise; I can't see any advantage to either readers or editors from either removing the dabs (ALT-2) or expanding them (ALT-1).
Oppose -- There is a lot of advantage in keeping category names short. UK is a well understood abbreviation. I suspect there are only a few countries which use this title for ministers.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:33, 21 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment: UK is the internationally recognised 2-letter code for Ukraine. As such it's definitely ambiguous. As such, I'd say the current name definitely needs to change, though I've no opinion as to which of the options given above is the best.
Grutness...wha?01:24, 22 February 2019 (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:Regions of West Africa by country
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: There's no reason for this category to exist. It has exactly ONE subcat,
Category:Regions of Ghana (which I've already added to
Category:Regions of Africa by country). I was hoping there were some other "Regions of" categories that could be added, but I checked out every country in West Africa, and NONE of them have such categories. (And surprise, surprise - this was created by a banned editor, User:Stanleytux. "The owner of this account is suspected of abusively using multiple accounts." <sigh>)
Anomalous+0 (
talk)
07:07, 20 February 2019 (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.
Association football in Northern Ireland
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.
Oppose Gaelic football is organised on an All-Ireland basis while association football is divided into two jurisdictions (RoI and NI). Very few Gaelic football articles/categories would even use the term "Northern Ireland" because of this. Gaelic football is played only in Ireland at a serious level and is virtually unknown about even in neighbouring England. There is no serious need to disambiguate here. In over 15 years editing Wikipedia, I've never found a single Gaelic football article/category mistakenly place in a "Northern Ireland football" category or vice versa. That said articles using "Northern Irish" should use "Northern Ireland"
DjlnDjln (
talk)
18:10, 23 February 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Djln, you're right about the difference in organisational structure, but there are categories for Gaelic football in "Northern Ireland". See
Category:Gaelic football in Northern Ireland and its subcats.
Support per nom, in accordance with parent article/category names and convention for Northern Irish/Ireland pages.
Oculi (
talk)
11:19, 11 March 2019 (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:Pornographic film actors with HIV/AIDS
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. Closing statement added later If the category is deleted, the parent category can be deleted per C1, meaning that DexDor's weak opposition can either be discounted or used as a weak support, since they clearly agreed to delete both. This weighing, combined with the different references to policies and guidelines, leads me to finding consensus to delete
Category:Pornographic film actors with HIV/AIDS.
(non-admin closure)DannyS712 (
talk)
07:05, 9 April 2019 (UTC) 07:42, 9 April 2019 (UTC)reply
The people in that mesothelioma category are notable for a variety of occupations. Also, that's less likely to affect how the person does the job. DexDor(talk)06:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose. We have Cat:PFA under Cat:SW so if we have Cat:SWwH/A it makes sense to also have Cat:PFAwH/A (unless you can show it's not relevant for the actors). DexDor(talk)06:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose. We have Cat:PFA under Cat:SW so if we have Cat:SWwH/A it makes sense to also have Cat:PFAwH/A (unless you can show it's not relevant for the actors). Or delete both this and Cat:SWwH/A. DexDor(talk)18:58, 23 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose - This is an odd category nomination, not "an odd category intersection". Seriously, the health (i.e. STDs) of Pornographic film actors is a longstanding issue, for fairly obvious reasons.
Anomalous+0 (
talk)
07:17, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete - We should not be having categories about people by disease, if alive, for the usual BLP reasons. There will commonly be an issue of verification and perhaps even libel issues.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:37, 21 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete Personally I find this category title and
Category:Sex workers with HIV/AIDS to be offensive. They could easily be used as weapons to target, bully or inappropriately label people. For all these reasons they should both be deleted immediately. Whoever formed them should also be warned about inappropriately naming categories.
DjlnDjln (
talk)
18:17, 23 February 2019 (UTC)reply
We require categories to be based on defining characteristics per
WP:DEFINING, in order to avoid that articles are being categorized by an endless list of minor characteristics that 'people may search for'.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
23:12, 14 March 2019 (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:USAAF Second Air Force Group Training Stations
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 now departed, banned user,
Bwmoll3, set up a this category with a reference. The reference was R. Frank Futrell, “The Development of Base Facilities,” in The Army Air Forces in World War II, vol. 6, Men and Planes, ed. Wesley Frank Craven and James Lea Cate, 142 (Washington, D.C., Office of Air Force History, new imprint, 1983). There are six pages in the category. I do not believe that whether these bases were Second Air Force group training installations is a defining characteristic of their existence, in line with
WP:CATDEF. I asked
Lineagegeek to comment, and he said "It sounds more like a subject for a list to me than a category. Just trying out brackets:
Category:First Air Force Group Training Stations,
Category:Third Air Force Group Training Stations.
Category:Fourth Air Force Group Training Stations,
Category:I Troop Carrier Command Group Training Stations would be direct equivalents in mission and time, but don't exist. Of the few bases put in this category two are listed under names they never had (common problem Nowadays the US Army has Army Airfields: during WW II it had Army Air Fields), and two more are listed under more recent civilian names (which in itself tells me that support for a "defining characteristic" is weak). The use of the term "group training station" also implies some sort of defining characteristic between group training stations and squadron or wing training stations (which I doubt exists). I see no reason for the category. If this were to appear on a delete category page, I'd support". Thus I've listed this category for deletion.
Buckshot06(talk)00:33, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Thankyou for identifying the other related categories. So just to clarify, the best way to handle this is if I withdraw this nomination and then list all twelve for deletion at the same time?
Buckshot06(talk)00:36, 21 February 2019 (UTC)reply
DexDor thankyou; given Lineagegeek's comments re listification above, I now propose all three categories be deleted and turned into a proper list article, with the associated reference.
Buckshot06(talk)23:17, 23 February 2019 (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:rename to reduce ambiguity. Ecclesiastical basilicas is a rare term, perhaps even a made-up term. The main article is at
Basilica and this category apparently refers to the third meaning of Basilica according to the numbering in the lead of the article. So
Category:Basilicas (disambiguator) is the clearest form.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
20:50, 20 February 2019 (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:Municipalities of the Republic of Macedonia
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 - the contents should be moved back as this is already at cfd. Moreover Johndavies837 should be rebuked for emptying a category undergoing cfd.
Oculi (
talk)
16:41, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
I have reverted the out-of-process emptying of the category by @
Johndavies837.
Sadly, @
Johndavies837's claim that they didn't realise the category was at CFD is a completely implausible. John could not have selected the category's contents for editing without visiting the category page, where there was a prominent CFD notice saying "This category is being considered for renaming to Category:Municipalities of North Macedonia". That same notice will have been visible to John when he made several edits to the category page, which I have also reverted. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
17:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Thank you for reverting my changes,
BrownHairedGirl. I had a bunch of Macedonia tabs open and, while switching through them, I saw a list that needed to be updated and went to work. I saw the CfD notice while doing that but it confused me because the nomination is for "Category:Republic of Macedonia", not "Category:Municipalities of the Republic of Macedonia". I thought the nomination was for a different category. I should have been more careful before making a large number of changes. Apologies. I haven't done a lot of editing yet. I realized my error when I was finished. But I have no stake in what the name ends up being and the CfD is overwhelmingly in favor of a name change.
Johndavies837 (
talk)
20:00, 20 February 2019 (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.
Association football in Ireland
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.
"Football" is an ambiguous term Ireland, because
Gaelic football is also a popular sport here; by some measures, Gaelic football is twice as popular as association football in Ireland . (See e.g. Fig 5.4 on page 45 of the 2003 ESRI report:
"The Social Significance of Sport" 34% of people had attended attend a Gaelic football matches in the previous 12 months, vs 16% attending a soccer match). --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
14:56, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose Gaelic football is organised on an All-Ireland basis while association football is divided into two jurisdictions (RoI and NI). Very few Gaelic football articles/categories would even use the term "Republic of Ireland" because of this. Gaelic football is played only in Ireland at a serious level and is virtually unknown about even in neighbouring England. There is no serious need to disambiguate here. In over 15 years editing Wikipedia, I've never found a single Gaelic football article/category mistakenly place in a "Republic of Ireland football" category or vice versa. Their is now accurate way to determine which code is more popular. The report BHG cites is over a decade old and does not take into account the massive TV audience in Ireland that watches the Premier League.
DjlnDjln (
talk)
18:00, 23 February 2019 (UTC)reply
The head category is
Category:Association football in Ireland, and it is a long-standing principle of en.wp categories that the category names should be consistent.
@
BrownHairedGirl: I would support amending the names of some of these categories. Basically the ones without a year or season in their title. There is no need to disambiguate a category when there is no other similar named category in existence. Seasonal and yearly categories for Gaelic football do not have "Irish", "Republic of Ireland" or "Northern Ireland" in their titles because Gaelic football is only played in Ireland and on All Ireland basis. Changing all these category names is a bit pointless. Many of the alternative titles you propose are long winded, add a layer of confusion and are completely unnecessary.
DjlnDjln (
talk)
14:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Djln, the names used for association football are a
WP:ENGVAR issue.
But within each country, the same considerations apply, so the policy is that we apply the principle of
WP:CONSISTENCY.
I am not aware of any other country where this policy is breached by using one name is used for the national parent categories, and a different name for the subcats. Are you?
We can have separate discussion about inconsistencies in the Gaelic football categories, if you or anyone else wants to nominate them. But this discusison is about the association football categories. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
15:04, 25 February 2019 (UTC)reply
WP:Consensus#Determining_consensus: "Consensus is ascertained by the quality of the arguments given on the various sides of an issue, as viewed through the lens of Wikipedia policy.".
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.
Secretaries of State (UK)
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.
Leaning towards oppose. The current titles are unambiguous and relatively concise; I can't see any advantage to either readers or editors from either removing the dabs (ALT-2) or expanding them (ALT-1).
Oppose -- There is a lot of advantage in keeping category names short. UK is a well understood abbreviation. I suspect there are only a few countries which use this title for ministers.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:33, 21 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment: UK is the internationally recognised 2-letter code for Ukraine. As such it's definitely ambiguous. As such, I'd say the current name definitely needs to change, though I've no opinion as to which of the options given above is the best.
Grutness...wha?01:24, 22 February 2019 (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:Regions of West Africa by country
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: There's no reason for this category to exist. It has exactly ONE subcat,
Category:Regions of Ghana (which I've already added to
Category:Regions of Africa by country). I was hoping there were some other "Regions of" categories that could be added, but I checked out every country in West Africa, and NONE of them have such categories. (And surprise, surprise - this was created by a banned editor, User:Stanleytux. "The owner of this account is suspected of abusively using multiple accounts." <sigh>)
Anomalous+0 (
talk)
07:07, 20 February 2019 (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.
Association football in Northern Ireland
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.
Oppose Gaelic football is organised on an All-Ireland basis while association football is divided into two jurisdictions (RoI and NI). Very few Gaelic football articles/categories would even use the term "Northern Ireland" because of this. Gaelic football is played only in Ireland at a serious level and is virtually unknown about even in neighbouring England. There is no serious need to disambiguate here. In over 15 years editing Wikipedia, I've never found a single Gaelic football article/category mistakenly place in a "Northern Ireland football" category or vice versa. That said articles using "Northern Irish" should use "Northern Ireland"
DjlnDjln (
talk)
18:10, 23 February 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Djln, you're right about the difference in organisational structure, but there are categories for Gaelic football in "Northern Ireland". See
Category:Gaelic football in Northern Ireland and its subcats.
Support per nom, in accordance with parent article/category names and convention for Northern Irish/Ireland pages.
Oculi (
talk)
11:19, 11 March 2019 (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:Pornographic film actors with HIV/AIDS
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. Closing statement added later If the category is deleted, the parent category can be deleted per C1, meaning that DexDor's weak opposition can either be discounted or used as a weak support, since they clearly agreed to delete both. This weighing, combined with the different references to policies and guidelines, leads me to finding consensus to delete
Category:Pornographic film actors with HIV/AIDS.
(non-admin closure)DannyS712 (
talk)
07:05, 9 April 2019 (UTC) 07:42, 9 April 2019 (UTC)reply
The people in that mesothelioma category are notable for a variety of occupations. Also, that's less likely to affect how the person does the job. DexDor(talk)06:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose. We have Cat:PFA under Cat:SW so if we have Cat:SWwH/A it makes sense to also have Cat:PFAwH/A (unless you can show it's not relevant for the actors). DexDor(talk)06:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose. We have Cat:PFA under Cat:SW so if we have Cat:SWwH/A it makes sense to also have Cat:PFAwH/A (unless you can show it's not relevant for the actors). Or delete both this and Cat:SWwH/A. DexDor(talk)18:58, 23 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose - This is an odd category nomination, not "an odd category intersection". Seriously, the health (i.e. STDs) of Pornographic film actors is a longstanding issue, for fairly obvious reasons.
Anomalous+0 (
talk)
07:17, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete - We should not be having categories about people by disease, if alive, for the usual BLP reasons. There will commonly be an issue of verification and perhaps even libel issues.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
15:37, 21 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete Personally I find this category title and
Category:Sex workers with HIV/AIDS to be offensive. They could easily be used as weapons to target, bully or inappropriately label people. For all these reasons they should both be deleted immediately. Whoever formed them should also be warned about inappropriately naming categories.
DjlnDjln (
talk)
18:17, 23 February 2019 (UTC)reply
We require categories to be based on defining characteristics per
WP:DEFINING, in order to avoid that articles are being categorized by an endless list of minor characteristics that 'people may search for'.
Marcocapelle (
talk)
23:12, 14 March 2019 (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:USAAF Second Air Force Group Training Stations
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 now departed, banned user,
Bwmoll3, set up a this category with a reference. The reference was R. Frank Futrell, “The Development of Base Facilities,” in The Army Air Forces in World War II, vol. 6, Men and Planes, ed. Wesley Frank Craven and James Lea Cate, 142 (Washington, D.C., Office of Air Force History, new imprint, 1983). There are six pages in the category. I do not believe that whether these bases were Second Air Force group training installations is a defining characteristic of their existence, in line with
WP:CATDEF. I asked
Lineagegeek to comment, and he said "It sounds more like a subject for a list to me than a category. Just trying out brackets:
Category:First Air Force Group Training Stations,
Category:Third Air Force Group Training Stations.
Category:Fourth Air Force Group Training Stations,
Category:I Troop Carrier Command Group Training Stations would be direct equivalents in mission and time, but don't exist. Of the few bases put in this category two are listed under names they never had (common problem Nowadays the US Army has Army Airfields: during WW II it had Army Air Fields), and two more are listed under more recent civilian names (which in itself tells me that support for a "defining characteristic" is weak). The use of the term "group training station" also implies some sort of defining characteristic between group training stations and squadron or wing training stations (which I doubt exists). I see no reason for the category. If this were to appear on a delete category page, I'd support". Thus I've listed this category for deletion.
Buckshot06(talk)00:33, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Thankyou for identifying the other related categories. So just to clarify, the best way to handle this is if I withdraw this nomination and then list all twelve for deletion at the same time?
Buckshot06(talk)00:36, 21 February 2019 (UTC)reply
DexDor thankyou; given Lineagegeek's comments re listification above, I now propose all three categories be deleted and turned into a proper list article, with the associated reference.
Buckshot06(talk)23:17, 23 February 2019 (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.