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.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 00:52, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: On June 15, 2010 the company officially changed its name from MGM Mirage to MGM Resorts International.
TheGoofyGolfer (
talk) 23:53, 29 October 2011 (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.
1st-century Christian church councils
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:Keep.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:21, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:There only 1 such council in the 1st century. No scope to expand. Not that many more in the 2nd century either.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 21:39, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Comment By that logic, a category should be created for
Category:2nd-century Christian church councils, despite the fact that no articles exist for it. Should that be allowed to stand in the way of relentless numeracy?
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 12:16, 30 October 2011 (UTC)reply
No, if there is nothing for a category you don't create it.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 19:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Clarification I think that my comment has been misinterpreted. If it's a bad idea to create a category just for aesthetic reasons to fulfil a neat numerical sequence, then it's also a bad idea to keep a category that has only one entry just for aesthetic reasons to fulfil a neat numerical sequence. As has been pointed out above,
WP:SMALLCAT is the relevant guide here.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 21:37, 30 October 2011 (UTC)reply
It is a part of a series, so size does not matter.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 05:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Where is it written that a series trumps WP:Size ? In fact, where is the policy / guideline on series ?
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 20:20, 8 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep - the parent categories (
Category:1st-century Christianity &
Category:3rd-century Christianity) of the two century specific categories show why these should be kept separate. Nothing should be in both categories, but this would need to happen with the suggested upmerge (to a category created by the nom after the nomination).
Beeswaxcandle (
talk) 06:25, 1 November 2011 (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:Amusement rides by opening year
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 to names proposed by Eureka Lott.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:27, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Rename. I think that the introductions tree and the associated naming change is a better name for this category. While it is true that the rides opened in the said year, they also were introduced in that year. We have established trees for introductions and establishments but not for opened in. If this change is approved I would also like to recreate century categories for the rides which were removed in a
previous discussion. At that time this category was small and the argument was that we don't need to do that. So far there are rides in three different centuries, and I suspect that there are articles on earlier ones. Also both major parents after this change group by century.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 20:51, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Note: If this is approved, a template change will be needed. That template change can also be used to move all of the articles into the new tree,
Category:Amusement rides introduced in yyyy. The bot can be used to move the text for the subcategories. If approved, leave a talk note for the template work.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 21:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Park could be an issue since all of these rides are not in amusement parks. As memory serves, there is a rather old carousel in a Paris park (not the amusement type of park) from the 1700s or 1800s that would not fit. What about a ride that is only on the traveling carnival circuit like
Eurostar? Then for modern rides, we have several not in parks like
The Roller Coaster? Do any of your local malls have a carousel or another amusement ride?
Vegaswikian (
talk) 18:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Rename using EurekaLott's suggestion.
Pichpich (
talk) 14:10, 7 November 2011 (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:Pease family (Darlington)
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
I'm inclined to oppose as the category is specifically for this family which has a larger number of well-known members but there are many well-known
Peases who are not in this family and have no connection (or no near connection) to this family except last name (but they themselves are in Pease families and some might be closely related to each other though not yet noted). --
Erp (
talk) 21:06, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Support as per other families, eg
Category:Fry family, as this is the only notable family with that name.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:16, 1 November 2011 (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:Trapp
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: This category, unlike most in
Category:Families, contains musicals, locations, charities, etc. But I still think it qualifies for renaming to
Category:Trapp family, because everything derives from the family.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 20:34, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Those two seemed a lot more clear-cut to me, which is why I put them up on Speedy. If you have objections, they can come over here too.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 18:10, 30 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:18, 1 November 2011 (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:Introductions
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Rename. This category is for special purpose high level introduction articles. The problem here is that introductions are are a full tree that can not roll up the the logical parent and conversely, this category does not lead down to them.
Category:Outlines may be a similar case.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 19:44, 29 October 2011 (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:Jackson family (Chicago)
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.
Support per nom.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:18, 1 November 2011 (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:Petimeza/Petmeza family
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Using the naming convention in all articles of this type, such as
Nikolaos Petimezas.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 19:25, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:20, 1 November 2011 (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:Plesent-Meserer
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Of course, a great idea to rename. (Just family name Plisetski (Plisetsky) in the United States - is
Plesent) --
Betsi Jane (
talk) 19:47, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:22, 1 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Update. I realized I used a hyphen instead of an en-dash, as is the standard. I've fixed that.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 02:20, 4 November 2011 (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:Bethmann family of merchants and bankers
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:19, 1 November 2011 (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:Stdlib.h
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.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 01:14, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Tagged for speedy deletion.
Tim! (
talk) 08:25, 30 October 2011 (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:Stdio.h
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:Speedy deleted.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Tagged for speedy deletion.
Tim! (
talk) 08:25, 30 October 2011 (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:Signal.h
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:Speedy deleted.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Tagged for speedy deletion.
Tim! (
talk) 08:25, 30 October 2011 (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.
Move some common sub-categories from Category:Cultures
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:Lego video games
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:Merge. Why on Earth should there be two nearly indentical categories with the same type of articles, but with some articles categorized on one and others categorized on the other? It seems to me that this could be very misleading and confusing, and it would be much better if the second category were to be merged into the first one. It's as simple as that.
69.204.38.3 (
talk) 10:41, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Much of the content of Lego games should be subcategorised into Lego video games.
Tim! (
talk) 08:19, 30 October 2011 (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:Rename.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 00:52, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: On June 15, 2010 the company officially changed its name from MGM Mirage to MGM Resorts International.
TheGoofyGolfer (
talk) 23:53, 29 October 2011 (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.
1st-century Christian church councils
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:Keep.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:21, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:There only 1 such council in the 1st century. No scope to expand. Not that many more in the 2nd century either.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 21:39, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Comment By that logic, a category should be created for
Category:2nd-century Christian church councils, despite the fact that no articles exist for it. Should that be allowed to stand in the way of relentless numeracy?
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 12:16, 30 October 2011 (UTC)reply
No, if there is nothing for a category you don't create it.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 19:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Clarification I think that my comment has been misinterpreted. If it's a bad idea to create a category just for aesthetic reasons to fulfil a neat numerical sequence, then it's also a bad idea to keep a category that has only one entry just for aesthetic reasons to fulfil a neat numerical sequence. As has been pointed out above,
WP:SMALLCAT is the relevant guide here.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 21:37, 30 October 2011 (UTC)reply
It is a part of a series, so size does not matter.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 05:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Where is it written that a series trumps WP:Size ? In fact, where is the policy / guideline on series ?
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 20:20, 8 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Keep - the parent categories (
Category:1st-century Christianity &
Category:3rd-century Christianity) of the two century specific categories show why these should be kept separate. Nothing should be in both categories, but this would need to happen with the suggested upmerge (to a category created by the nom after the nomination).
Beeswaxcandle (
talk) 06:25, 1 November 2011 (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:Amusement rides by opening year
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 to names proposed by Eureka Lott.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:27, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Rename. I think that the introductions tree and the associated naming change is a better name for this category. While it is true that the rides opened in the said year, they also were introduced in that year. We have established trees for introductions and establishments but not for opened in. If this change is approved I would also like to recreate century categories for the rides which were removed in a
previous discussion. At that time this category was small and the argument was that we don't need to do that. So far there are rides in three different centuries, and I suspect that there are articles on earlier ones. Also both major parents after this change group by century.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 20:51, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Note: If this is approved, a template change will be needed. That template change can also be used to move all of the articles into the new tree,
Category:Amusement rides introduced in yyyy. The bot can be used to move the text for the subcategories. If approved, leave a talk note for the template work.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 21:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Park could be an issue since all of these rides are not in amusement parks. As memory serves, there is a rather old carousel in a Paris park (not the amusement type of park) from the 1700s or 1800s that would not fit. What about a ride that is only on the traveling carnival circuit like
Eurostar? Then for modern rides, we have several not in parks like
The Roller Coaster? Do any of your local malls have a carousel or another amusement ride?
Vegaswikian (
talk) 18:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Rename using EurekaLott's suggestion.
Pichpich (
talk) 14:10, 7 November 2011 (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:Pease family (Darlington)
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
I'm inclined to oppose as the category is specifically for this family which has a larger number of well-known members but there are many well-known
Peases who are not in this family and have no connection (or no near connection) to this family except last name (but they themselves are in Pease families and some might be closely related to each other though not yet noted). --
Erp (
talk) 21:06, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Support as per other families, eg
Category:Fry family, as this is the only notable family with that name.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:16, 1 November 2011 (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:Trapp
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: This category, unlike most in
Category:Families, contains musicals, locations, charities, etc. But I still think it qualifies for renaming to
Category:Trapp family, because everything derives from the family.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 20:34, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Those two seemed a lot more clear-cut to me, which is why I put them up on Speedy. If you have objections, they can come over here too.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 18:10, 30 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:18, 1 November 2011 (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:Introductions
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Rename. This category is for special purpose high level introduction articles. The problem here is that introductions are are a full tree that can not roll up the the logical parent and conversely, this category does not lead down to them.
Category:Outlines may be a similar case.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 19:44, 29 October 2011 (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:Jackson family (Chicago)
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.
Support per nom.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:18, 1 November 2011 (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:Petimeza/Petmeza family
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Using the naming convention in all articles of this type, such as
Nikolaos Petimezas.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 19:25, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:20, 1 November 2011 (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:Plesent-Meserer
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Of course, a great idea to rename. (Just family name Plisetski (Plisetsky) in the United States - is
Plesent) --
Betsi Jane (
talk) 19:47, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:22, 1 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Update. I realized I used a hyphen instead of an en-dash, as is the standard. I've fixed that.--
Mike Selinker (
talk) 02:20, 4 November 2011 (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:Bethmann family of merchants and bankers
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.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Cjc13 (
talk) 15:19, 1 November 2011 (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:Stdlib.h
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.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 01:14, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Tagged for speedy deletion.
Tim! (
talk) 08:25, 30 October 2011 (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:Stdio.h
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:Speedy deleted.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Tagged for speedy deletion.
Tim! (
talk) 08:25, 30 October 2011 (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:Signal.h
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:Speedy deleted.
Dana boomer (
talk) 00:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
Tagged for speedy deletion.
Tim! (
talk) 08:25, 30 October 2011 (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.
Move some common sub-categories from Category:Cultures
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:Lego video games
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:Merge. Why on Earth should there be two nearly indentical categories with the same type of articles, but with some articles categorized on one and others categorized on the other? It seems to me that this could be very misleading and confusing, and it would be much better if the second category were to be merged into the first one. It's as simple as that.
69.204.38.3 (
talk) 10:41, 29 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Much of the content of Lego games should be subcategorised into Lego video games.
Tim! (
talk) 08:19, 30 October 2011 (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.