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. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(
talk •
contribs) 16:36, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary Catagory, Contains 6 articles. 3 of which are redirects, Which is too low to justify a whole category.
PerryPerryDTalk To Me 23:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Correction, 7 unique articles including the Dream SMP article. 3 of the articles are redirects, with 2 of those redirects simply going to the Dream SMP article. ―
Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:01, 15 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Currently there is only the main article and a subcategory. It would be very helpful to keep the articles in the category during the discussion. See the explicit instruction about that at the
WP:CFD page. Or at least be transparent about which articles have been removed and why.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:45, 15 March 2022 (UTC)reply
@
Marcocapelle: Apologies. I'm interpreting the subcategory as part of the main category. If that's incorrect let me know. ―
Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:37, 15 March 2022 (UTC)reply
No problem at all. The nomination entails the subcategory (with 8 articles) to be kept, but then
Category:Dream SMP is entirely redundant.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 17:55, 15 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom and others. I was also the one who brought this up on
WT:VG which was what prompted Perry to start this CFD. ―
Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:55, 16 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:01, 21 March 2022 (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:Pioneer Railcorp
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:rename. –
FayenaticLondon 22:00, 26 April 2022 (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.
Latgalian artists
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.
Agreed, that makes sense. There is an article
Latgalian pottery which confirms a valid intersection for ceramists, and even for C20 ceramists specifically. –
FayenaticLondon 08:34, 17 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge somehow per SMALLCAT. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:06, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Upmerge to Latvian artists. Having a category for one article is not justified.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:01, 4 April 2022 (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:Organizations associated with effective altruism
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: Fails
WP:ASSOCIATEDWITH. A cursory look at the organizations listed indicates that this cat comprises a variety of organizations that are just doing "good things", generally without a clear explanation of what their "association" with
effective altruism consists of. I also see a potential for corporate abuse, as any company that declares its love for effective altruism in its PR materials is liable to be listed there. Disclosure: I come from
Talk:FTX.
JBchrchtalk 23:49, 8 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep. Effective altruism is not just doing good things. These are organizations associated in material, cultural, and ideological ways with the particular philosophical and social movement of
effective altruism. This is why the
WikiProject Effective Altruism was started and why editors have been working hard to populate this and related categories. However, I think you could rename it "Effective altruism organizations" or something to reduce vagueness; I don't have a strong opinion there.
Jmill1806 (
talk) 14:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)reply
I don't understand what an "effective altruism organization" would be. Those are either non-profits, charities etc... It would be like saying "utilitarian organizations" or "consequentialist organizations" -- what would that mean? There's no getting around the notion that a "[ideology] organizations" cat is just like saying "organization associated with [ideology]". I was not implying, however, that effective altruism is just doing good things, just noting that this category currently fails at precise and effective categorization, which is precisely why ASSOCIATEDWITH exists.
JBchrchtalk 14:22, 9 February 2022 (UTC)reply
I would also like clarification on this point. Are they organisations who happen to act in a way consistent with effective altruism? Ones that actively and explicitly promote it? Ones that explicitly self-identify or are consistently explicitly identified as having a philosophy of effective altruism? If it's the former, that's absolutely too vague and unhelpful, and should be deleted. If it's either or both of the latter, the category needs to be purged, renamed (likely to
Category:Effective altruism organizations, as suggested), and have a category description to that effect. Or maybe it would still need to be deleted, depending on whether any articles actually meet the definition. If the definition is something else, I would say it still should be purged, renamed, and have a good description (and maybe deleted anyway). --
Xurizuri (
talk) 03:49, 10 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Agree on if the category is kept it should be renamed, in order to avoid weasel language.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the discussion. I think we can have much more specificity than "utilitarian" or "consequentialism." Those are schools of thought, not social movements. I think self-identification and third-party identification should both count towards inclusion in this category, whether or not it's renamed. Like most things on Wikipedia, this is a matter of degree, not kind.
Jmill1806 (
talk) 01:08, 11 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep. I don't see there being a problem of subjectivity here. Either it passes
WP:CATVER (i.e. it's consistently described in RS as being associated with
effective altruism) or it doesn't. I'm open to Jmill1806's suggestion of perhaps renaming to something like "Effective altruism organizations".
Colin M (
talk) 20:17, 9 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Fair point and an extra reason for deletion. Sources about these organizations do not consistently describe them as associated with effective altruism.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep. Useful and reasonable category. As I've never searched for sth like that I had regrettably never seen it. Wikipedia is made for the usability of our users! --
Just N. (
talk) 16:14, 15 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename to something that makes it clear "effective" is actually part of a technical term and not some PR glorification (can't imagine the average person is going to be too familiar with the concept named
effective altruism, so the fact that it's actually the common name of the idea and not mere PR fluff isn't going to come across for most people). Maybe something like
Category:Organizations within the effective altruism movement. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist(Speak quickly)(Follow my trail) 22:32, 20 February 2022 (UTC)reply
To me, that's just paraphrasing "associated with".
JBchrchtalk 19:12, 22 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: To enable consideration of renaming proposals. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
FayenaticLondon 16:14, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep I agree with Jmill1806.
Dimadick (
talk) 03:55, 17 March 2022 (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:Atomic Cities
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: "
Atomic city" doesn't appear to be a thing and nothing fits at
Atomic City. Perhaps could be merged elsewhere.
Brandmeistertalk 12:48, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete or merge per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:09, 21 March 2022 (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:ABS-CBN television drama filmed in high definition
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: No similar category exists for any other television company anywhere in the world. Little affinity between the members of the set.
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c) 07:09, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:10, 21 March 2022 (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.
Merge per nominator.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 10:26, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:13, 21 March 2022 (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:Waste facilities in Israel
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 nominator.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 14:45, 14 March 2022 (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:Skinny houses
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: From what I see, skinny houses are basically the same as spite houses, we just don't have the
skinny house article, unlike
spite house.
Brandmeistertalk 18:27, 20 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I'm not a fan of
Category:Skinny houses because membership in the category appears to be quite subjective. However, it's clear that not all (in fact most) houses in
Category:Skinny houses are not
spite houses, they just happen to be unusually narrow.
Pichpich (
talk) 22:09, 20 February 2022 (UTC)reply
In that case I'd nominate for deletion. Neither web nor
books indicate their notability as a standalone thing.
Brandmeistertalk 11:04, 21 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom's later reply. Listification may still be appropriate though.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:51, 25 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 03:42, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom's later reply. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:15, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete we lack an article on skinny house as a concept. We also lack any even proposed definition, let alone one that has reliable source agreement.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:04, 4 April 2022 (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:Suspended structures
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.
Manual merge, per nom, but note that bridges articles should not be added to the target since they are already in the bridges subcategory. Marcocapelle (
talk) 12:39, 25 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Prefer reverse merge -- suspension bridges and cable-stayed bridges should be subcategories. Alternatively move most of the content (non-bridge) to a new
Category:suspended buildings subcat.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:31, 26 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 03:34, 14 March 2022 (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:Jewish communities that were destroyed in the Holocaust
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:rename. –
FayenaticLondon 21:58, 26 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Too verbose.
Loew Galitz (
talk) 02:10, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Support Overly long title.
Dimadick (
talk) 03:57, 17 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Support -- Brevity is commendable in cats.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 14:39, 19 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:17, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Support: would say the same in fewer words. --
El clemente (
talk) 21:16, 25 April 2022 (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:Senators of the 60th and 61st legislature of Mexico
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. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(
talk •
contribs) 16:36, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary Catagory, Contains 6 articles. 3 of which are redirects, Which is too low to justify a whole category.
PerryPerryDTalk To Me 23:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Correction, 7 unique articles including the Dream SMP article. 3 of the articles are redirects, with 2 of those redirects simply going to the Dream SMP article. ―
Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:01, 15 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Currently there is only the main article and a subcategory. It would be very helpful to keep the articles in the category during the discussion. See the explicit instruction about that at the
WP:CFD page. Or at least be transparent about which articles have been removed and why.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:45, 15 March 2022 (UTC)reply
@
Marcocapelle: Apologies. I'm interpreting the subcategory as part of the main category. If that's incorrect let me know. ―
Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:37, 15 March 2022 (UTC)reply
No problem at all. The nomination entails the subcategory (with 8 articles) to be kept, but then
Category:Dream SMP is entirely redundant.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 17:55, 15 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom and others. I was also the one who brought this up on
WT:VG which was what prompted Perry to start this CFD. ―
Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:55, 16 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:01, 21 March 2022 (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:Pioneer Railcorp
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:rename. –
FayenaticLondon 22:00, 26 April 2022 (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.
Latgalian artists
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.
Agreed, that makes sense. There is an article
Latgalian pottery which confirms a valid intersection for ceramists, and even for C20 ceramists specifically. –
FayenaticLondon 08:34, 17 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge somehow per SMALLCAT. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:06, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Upmerge to Latvian artists. Having a category for one article is not justified.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:01, 4 April 2022 (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:Organizations associated with effective altruism
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: Fails
WP:ASSOCIATEDWITH. A cursory look at the organizations listed indicates that this cat comprises a variety of organizations that are just doing "good things", generally without a clear explanation of what their "association" with
effective altruism consists of. I also see a potential for corporate abuse, as any company that declares its love for effective altruism in its PR materials is liable to be listed there. Disclosure: I come from
Talk:FTX.
JBchrchtalk 23:49, 8 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep. Effective altruism is not just doing good things. These are organizations associated in material, cultural, and ideological ways with the particular philosophical and social movement of
effective altruism. This is why the
WikiProject Effective Altruism was started and why editors have been working hard to populate this and related categories. However, I think you could rename it "Effective altruism organizations" or something to reduce vagueness; I don't have a strong opinion there.
Jmill1806 (
talk) 14:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)reply
I don't understand what an "effective altruism organization" would be. Those are either non-profits, charities etc... It would be like saying "utilitarian organizations" or "consequentialist organizations" -- what would that mean? There's no getting around the notion that a "[ideology] organizations" cat is just like saying "organization associated with [ideology]". I was not implying, however, that effective altruism is just doing good things, just noting that this category currently fails at precise and effective categorization, which is precisely why ASSOCIATEDWITH exists.
JBchrchtalk 14:22, 9 February 2022 (UTC)reply
I would also like clarification on this point. Are they organisations who happen to act in a way consistent with effective altruism? Ones that actively and explicitly promote it? Ones that explicitly self-identify or are consistently explicitly identified as having a philosophy of effective altruism? If it's the former, that's absolutely too vague and unhelpful, and should be deleted. If it's either or both of the latter, the category needs to be purged, renamed (likely to
Category:Effective altruism organizations, as suggested), and have a category description to that effect. Or maybe it would still need to be deleted, depending on whether any articles actually meet the definition. If the definition is something else, I would say it still should be purged, renamed, and have a good description (and maybe deleted anyway). --
Xurizuri (
talk) 03:49, 10 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Agree on if the category is kept it should be renamed, in order to avoid weasel language.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the discussion. I think we can have much more specificity than "utilitarian" or "consequentialism." Those are schools of thought, not social movements. I think self-identification and third-party identification should both count towards inclusion in this category, whether or not it's renamed. Like most things on Wikipedia, this is a matter of degree, not kind.
Jmill1806 (
talk) 01:08, 11 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep. I don't see there being a problem of subjectivity here. Either it passes
WP:CATVER (i.e. it's consistently described in RS as being associated with
effective altruism) or it doesn't. I'm open to Jmill1806's suggestion of perhaps renaming to something like "Effective altruism organizations".
Colin M (
talk) 20:17, 9 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Fair point and an extra reason for deletion. Sources about these organizations do not consistently describe them as associated with effective altruism.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep. Useful and reasonable category. As I've never searched for sth like that I had regrettably never seen it. Wikipedia is made for the usability of our users! --
Just N. (
talk) 16:14, 15 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename to something that makes it clear "effective" is actually part of a technical term and not some PR glorification (can't imagine the average person is going to be too familiar with the concept named
effective altruism, so the fact that it's actually the common name of the idea and not mere PR fluff isn't going to come across for most people). Maybe something like
Category:Organizations within the effective altruism movement. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist(Speak quickly)(Follow my trail) 22:32, 20 February 2022 (UTC)reply
To me, that's just paraphrasing "associated with".
JBchrchtalk 19:12, 22 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: To enable consideration of renaming proposals. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
FayenaticLondon 16:14, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep I agree with Jmill1806.
Dimadick (
talk) 03:55, 17 March 2022 (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:Atomic Cities
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: "
Atomic city" doesn't appear to be a thing and nothing fits at
Atomic City. Perhaps could be merged elsewhere.
Brandmeistertalk 12:48, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete or merge per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:09, 21 March 2022 (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:ABS-CBN television drama filmed in high definition
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: No similar category exists for any other television company anywhere in the world. Little affinity between the members of the set.
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c) 07:09, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:10, 21 March 2022 (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.
Merge per nominator.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 10:26, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:13, 21 March 2022 (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:Waste facilities in Israel
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 nominator.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 14:45, 14 March 2022 (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:Skinny houses
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: From what I see, skinny houses are basically the same as spite houses, we just don't have the
skinny house article, unlike
spite house.
Brandmeistertalk 18:27, 20 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I'm not a fan of
Category:Skinny houses because membership in the category appears to be quite subjective. However, it's clear that not all (in fact most) houses in
Category:Skinny houses are not
spite houses, they just happen to be unusually narrow.
Pichpich (
talk) 22:09, 20 February 2022 (UTC)reply
In that case I'd nominate for deletion. Neither web nor
books indicate their notability as a standalone thing.
Brandmeistertalk 11:04, 21 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom's later reply. Listification may still be appropriate though.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 09:51, 25 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 03:42, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom's later reply. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:15, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete we lack an article on skinny house as a concept. We also lack any even proposed definition, let alone one that has reliable source agreement.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:04, 4 April 2022 (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:Suspended structures
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.
Manual merge, per nom, but note that bridges articles should not be added to the target since they are already in the bridges subcategory. Marcocapelle (
talk) 12:39, 25 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Prefer reverse merge -- suspension bridges and cable-stayed bridges should be subcategories. Alternatively move most of the content (non-bridge) to a new
Category:suspended buildings subcat.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 16:31, 26 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 03:34, 14 March 2022 (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:Jewish communities that were destroyed in the Holocaust
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:rename. –
FayenaticLondon 21:58, 26 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Too verbose.
Loew Galitz (
talk) 02:10, 14 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Support Overly long title.
Dimadick (
talk) 03:57, 17 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Support -- Brevity is commendable in cats.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 14:39, 19 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 10:17, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Support: would say the same in fewer words. --
El clemente (
talk) 21:16, 25 April 2022 (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:Senators of the 60th and 61st legislature of Mexico