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 manually.
MER-C 11:27, 17 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Not defining. The vast majority of online encyclopedias appear to be free, or at least the articles say nothing about payment. If we need a subcategory it should be those which are not free, but I think it would be too small to be useful.
Rathfelder (
talk) 22:41, 5 November 2019 (UTC)reply
I thought I had checked the content of
Category:Free encyclopedias this morning, but apparently not. In that case I support the nomination.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 16:59, 6 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Ok, I see, so I was not entirely mistaken.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 12:23, 8 November 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.
The result of the discussion was:delete.
MER-C 12:23, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary per
WP:SMALLCAT for only a list of episodes. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:25, 5 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support, TWO articles on the same topic and someone goes and creates a category? C'mon now. And since the show ended in 2009, I doubt coverage will be growing. (I was worried there would also be a navbox to go with all this excess, but thankfully that was either never attempted or already deleted.) --
FeRDNYC (
talk) 01:56, 6 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support - yeah, that's overkill. A "See also" section in the key article would handle it.
Grutness...wha? 02:35, 7 November 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.
The result of the discussion was:delete.
MER-C 12:25, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: I don't see a need for "year by month" categories like this one. While one could easily add the rest of the
Portal:Current events subpages for the other 11 months in 1999 to this category and create similar categories for other years, I see the category as being redundant to
Category:Months in the 1990s. The parent category
Category:Years by month should then also be deleted as an empty category.
GeoffreyT2000 (
talk) 05:07, 5 November 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.
The result of the discussion was:merge manually.
MER-C 11:27, 17 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Not defining. The vast majority of online encyclopedias appear to be free, or at least the articles say nothing about payment. If we need a subcategory it should be those which are not free, but I think it would be too small to be useful.
Rathfelder (
talk) 22:41, 5 November 2019 (UTC)reply
I thought I had checked the content of
Category:Free encyclopedias this morning, but apparently not. In that case I support the nomination.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 16:59, 6 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Ok, I see, so I was not entirely mistaken.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 12:23, 8 November 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.
The result of the discussion was:delete.
MER-C 12:23, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary per
WP:SMALLCAT for only a list of episodes. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:25, 5 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support, TWO articles on the same topic and someone goes and creates a category? C'mon now. And since the show ended in 2009, I doubt coverage will be growing. (I was worried there would also be a navbox to go with all this excess, but thankfully that was either never attempted or already deleted.) --
FeRDNYC (
talk) 01:56, 6 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support - yeah, that's overkill. A "See also" section in the key article would handle it.
Grutness...wha? 02:35, 7 November 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.
The result of the discussion was:delete.
MER-C 12:25, 13 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: I don't see a need for "year by month" categories like this one. While one could easily add the rest of the
Portal:Current events subpages for the other 11 months in 1999 to this category and create similar categories for other years, I see the category as being redundant to
Category:Months in the 1990s. The parent category
Category:Years by month should then also be deleted as an empty category.
GeoffreyT2000 (
talk) 05:07, 5 November 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.