The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 14:17, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 14:16, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Violates the "if you go to the article from the category, will it be obvious why it's there" rule. Would work much better as a well annotated list. SimonP 18:10, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
Delete I'm amazed Railway missing links survived a vfd. Nobody seemed clear as to its purpose then. I think the premise is that there are hypothetical railway lines which would exist were existing lines joined up, and therefore these parts which would join existing lines up are missing links. Since this is an attempt to categorise something that only exists hypothetically, isn't that POV? Hiding 10:08, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was keep -- Kbdank71 14:09, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Redundant with the older Category:Free software games.-- Eloquence * 14:53, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 14:03, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Let's not encourage the creation of articles about the non-notable children of celebrities. Of the three people currently listed, I have listed two for VfD for lack of notability. The third ( Melora Hardin) is extremely stubbish, although it could be expanded, but we don't have an article about her father. Rick K 06:29, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 13:59, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
If a person is notable enough to have an article, then they're a celebrity in their own right. If they are notable only as bieng the relative of a celebrity, they shouldn't have an article. Either way, this category is unworkable. Rick K 06:31, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 14:17, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 14:16, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Violates the "if you go to the article from the category, will it be obvious why it's there" rule. Would work much better as a well annotated list. SimonP 18:10, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
Delete I'm amazed Railway missing links survived a vfd. Nobody seemed clear as to its purpose then. I think the premise is that there are hypothetical railway lines which would exist were existing lines joined up, and therefore these parts which would join existing lines up are missing links. Since this is an attempt to categorise something that only exists hypothetically, isn't that POV? Hiding 10:08, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was keep -- Kbdank71 14:09, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Redundant with the older Category:Free software games.-- Eloquence * 14:53, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 14:03, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Let's not encourage the creation of articles about the non-notable children of celebrities. Of the three people currently listed, I have listed two for VfD for lack of notability. The third ( Melora Hardin) is extremely stubbish, although it could be expanded, but we don't have an article about her father. Rick K 06:29, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete -- Kbdank71 13:59, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
If a person is notable enough to have an article, then they're a celebrity in their own right. If they are notable only as bieng the relative of a celebrity, they shouldn't have an article. Either way, this category is unworkable. Rick K 06:31, May 30, 2005 (UTC)