Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 October 29

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 16:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, or at least rename to Category:American Basketball Association All-Star Game venues. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 23:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Osomec 23:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 16:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, we should simply note the Hall of Fame members within the Deadspin article. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 22:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 16:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Uzbek is an ambiguous term for the people, language, or country of Uzbekistan. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 21:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per nom. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 23:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. David Kernow (talk) 01:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom Hmains 03:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename to Category:Bank robberies. --RobertG ♬ talk 09:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ProveIt ^(talk) 18:02, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from speedy. Vegaswikian 18:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:Bank robberies. Plural should be used. Vegaswikian 18:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename to Category:Bank robberies, per Vegaswikian. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 18:54, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename correct caps, per nom, and to plural form, per Vegaswikian. - jc37 12:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename to Category:Bank robberies per Vegaswikian. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 23:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename to 'Category:Bank robberies' and populate by moving relevant articles to it from the 'Category: Robberies' Hmains 05:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated --Kbdank71 16:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hybrid citrus into Category:Citrus

• Merge, almost all citrus fruit are hybrids and there is some debate about which ones are not. GameKeeper 18:02, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge as above. Even the Orange (fruit) is almost certainly a hybrid. Jcam 01:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - per the Tangelo, for example. Perhaps the category needs a clearer name of what's to be included? - jc37 12:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on jc37's opposition. Perhaps Category:Portmanteau citrus would be better name. As mentioned by Jcam, the Orange (fruit) is just as much a hybrid as the Tangelo. Infact they may both be hybrids of Tangerine and Pomelo. See Citrus#History for the 4/5 most likely candidates for un-hybridised citrus, but even these are debatable. GameKeeper 13:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Portmanteau citrus sounds like a better name. The problem with "hybrid" is that it would seem that nearly all foods now are hybrids. - jc37 03:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I still want a Merge into Citrus. I think even Category:Portmanteau citrus is a useless way to categorise citrus. The only hit on google for this name is here! GameKeeper 08:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge - The division between "hybrid" citrus and "normal" citrus obviously is not very distinct. Having the division is neither helpful nor necessary. George J. Bendo 21:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was no consensus --Kbdank71 16:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Major league players from California into Category:Major League Baseball players from California; accuracy. Pegship 19:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Moved from Speedy doesn't meet criteria, accuracy not speedyable. Hiding Talk 17:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom. - jc37 12:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• The current name matches the other categories in Category:American Major League Baseball players by home state. Oppose unless the other categories are also nominated for renaming. - EurekaLott 02:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I agree that the others should be renamed as well. Anyone want to nominate them? - jc37 03:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - If someone should nominate them, I believe the correct category name should be Major League Baseball players born in (State), not "from" the state. AFAIK, each of the categories seems to include only players born in a given state. However, saying that someone is "from" a state just because he was born there can be misleading. To pick a handful of numerous examples:
  • Roger Clemens is most commonly identified with Texas, despite having lived in Ohio for his first 15 years.
  • George Brett
    was born in West Virginia, but spent the greater part of his childhood in Southern California, and developed as a baseball player there. Saying that he's from West Virginia may be technically accurate, but misleading.
  • Johnny Damon was only born in Kansas because that's where his father was stationed with the Army. He lived in many places as a child, but eventually settled in Florida after his father left the Army.
  • Although not a player, and thus not belonging in a category of MLB players, pitching coach extraordinaire Leo Mazzone is a perfect example of this dichotomy. He was born in West Virginia, but only because it had the nearest hospital to the Maryland town his parents lived in at the time. To say he's "from West Virginia" would be HIGHLY misleading. — Dale Arnett 09:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete, empty --Kbdank71 16:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mythic Online Games into Category:Mythic online games ProveIt ^(talk) 18:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(It's a confusing name even with capitalization fixed. Should be Category:Mythic Entertainment online games, which however is not speediable. Henning Makholm 20:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC))[reply]

• Moved from Speedy - contested. Hiding Talk 17:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename to Category:Mythic Entertainment online games per Henning Makholm. I agree, it's a better name. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 21:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename to Category:Mythic Entertainment online games - since it's here...  : ) - jc37 12:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. --RobertG ♬ talk 09:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Actors who played HIV-positive characters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Delete, only one article in the category. It could, of course, have hundreds of articles in it, but why? Categorizing actors by the health of the characters they have played is not helpful. —

• Delete per nom. --musicpvm 17:39, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Osomec 23:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete performer by performance. - jc37 12:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Greg Grahame 13:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Pavel Vozenilek 16:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated --Kbdank71 16:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Roy Harper songs, convention of Category:Songs by artist. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:33, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 22:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom. Piccadilly 11:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename.--Mike Selinker 12:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 16:15, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, or at least rename to something less awkward. Suggestions anyone? -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to
  naming convention for "education". - jc37 12:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Is the "(education)" necessary...?  Regards, David Kernow (talk) 23:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, neologism, bad format, useless. Pavel Vozenilek 16:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was rename/merge as nominated --Kbdank71 16:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Category:Memoirists, since they are authors of memoirs. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:Writers of memoirs. I believe "writing one's memoirs" is the more "common" phrase. - jc37 12:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom as an obviously correct usage of a common word. One is "writing one's memoirs" when they are not yet published, after they have come out one is a memoirist. Greg Grahame 13:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm having trouble finding such a word in the dictionary [1] : ) - jc37 03:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Try [2] or [3]. Another word for someone who writes memoirs is "memorialist" [4] [5]. As long as

  gr 10:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Rename per nom. Piccadilly 11:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. ReeseM 13:11, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. 236,000 ghits, the first of which is a dictionary definition. Wimstead 17:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. --RobertG ♬ talk 09:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters created by Stan Lee (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Delete and listify overspecialized category. There is no Category:Fictional characters created by William Shakespeare, Category:Fictional characters created by Charles Dickens, Category:Fictional characters created by Stephen King, or Category:Fictional characters created by Bob Kane. Plus, given the hundreds of characters Stan Lee created or co-created, this category is virtually unpopulated with only three entries. Category title also suggest that Lee created these by himself when, in fact, the respective artists are normally considered co-creators. Doczilla 05:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete However we do have Category:Charles Dickens characters and [[:Category:Shakespearean characters, and rightly too, but Stan Lee isn't Dickens or Shakespeare. Honbicot 11:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm really tempted to say "keep" as few creators come close to coming up with as many characters who are still important today. On the other hand, given the creatorship disputes between Lee and Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby, among others, and the fact he virtually always collaborated with others, plus the Just Imagine... series, and his independent works... and it wouldn't really be fair to exclude many of the other prolific creators, especially Kirby. So, delete, listify and set a precedent. --HKMarks(T/C) 16:34, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Stan who? —
  gr 17:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Creator of pretty much every Marvel comics character made before 1985, including Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four, and the Hulk. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:25, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I found some info on Stan Lee in an online encyclopedia if that helps? :). Listify. Hiding Talk 07:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well not completely the creator - indeed even in the Fantastic Four's fictional universe when they recently went into the afterlife and met their creator he was Jack Kirby! Timrollpickering 15:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Ignoring that if fully populated it could possibly duplicate much of the Marvel categories, it would require citations in a way not possible by categories. (The Jack Kirby controversies, for example.) Categorisation by comic book creator is likely not a good idea. - jc37 12:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The creator credits are way too controversial for a clearcut category. Timrollpickering 15:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was delete. --RobertG ♬ talk 09:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional characters created by Chris Claremont (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Delete and listify overspecialized category. There is no Category:Fictional characters created by William Shakespeare, Category:Fictional characters created by Charles Dickens, or Category:Fictional characters created by Stephen King. Also, the category is vaguely defined, categorizing characters that Claremont "had a hand" in creating. Doczilla 05:43, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete However we do have Category:Charles Dickens characters and Category:Shakespearean characters, and rightly too, but Stan Lee isn't Dickens or Shakespeare (and nor is Stephen King). Honbicot 11:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and listify a bad use of categories, especially since almost all his characters are co-creations. --HKMarks(T/C) 16:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - per my comments under Stan Lee, above. - jc37 12:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was {{

Category:Professors (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Delete, along with Category:College and university professors. These categories are newly created, populated buy one entry (the same one), and redundant with Category:Academics. --Eliyak T·C 01:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above. The world has too many professors, and I say this as one of them. Don't categorize every person's article by occupation. Categories would then become overcrowded to pointlessness. -- Doczilla 05:50, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both and mark as deleted categories. Category:Professors has been deleted at least once before, and will keep coming back unless it is blocked. Honbicot 11:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Category:Academics, in the United States we call them Professors; the redirect is really needed. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:25, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Cat redirect. Vegaswikian 18:10, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per ProveIt. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 19:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect both categories to Category:Academics per ProveIt. Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.