Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 December 3

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was upmerge the one (currently) surviving article as suggested by Otto.

Category:Mortal Kombat realms (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Has two article in it now, by the time you read this it will probably be empty due to article consolidation and other reasons. Judgesurreal777 23:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Recategorize existing articles to parent category. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 01:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Upmerge to Category:Video game locations and Category:Mortal Kombat. In case either of the remaining articles in the subcat should survive AFD they need to be in those category structures. Otto4711 02:44, 4 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was rename all. Kbdank71 (talk) 15:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Killed in action to Category:Military personnel killed in action

Propose renaming Category:Killed in action by conflict to Category:Military personnel killed in action by conflict Category:Military personnel killed in action by war

Propose renaming Category:Spanish killed in action to Category:Spanish military personnel killed in action

Nominator's rationale: Rename for consistency with the other sub-categories in Category:Killed in action and to make it clear that these cats are for military personnel only. jwillbur 21:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename all as per nom. Lugnuts 08:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename all (although the second one should really be Category:Military personnel killed in action by war, to match the parent Category:Military personnel by war). Kirill 18:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  Agreed, nom has been changed. jwillbur 02:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename, for consistency, however, how is the new category to be related to the similar category Category:Journalists killed in action? Also, in the case of Spanish killed in action, I think it contains several people who were technically civilians: these people's articles need to be moved to an appropriate related category. Jaraalbe (talk) 22:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mea culpa, I was confusing, the separate category Category:Military personnel killed in the Spanish Civil War with Category:Spanish killed in action. Jaraalbe (talk) 22:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been debating what to do with the journalists one. Since "killed in action" usually applies to military personnel only, I think it should probably be renamed to Category:Journalists killed while covering war, which would be consistent with the names of its sub-cats. For the Spanish Civil War cat, I went ahead and created Category:People killed in the Spanish Civil War for civilians, which has the military personnel one as a sub-cat. jwillbur 02:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename all per nom; the journalist category is not part of this nomination. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename it is more resonable to do so cause KIa makes people wonder in what? - Mr.NorCal55 (talk) 23:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename all nom, if we are sure there are no more civilians lurking in the cats. Johnbod (talk) 14:08, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename all per nom and per
  WP:MOS.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 19:05, 7 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was merge per otto. Kbdank71 (talk) 15:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Suliban ship classes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Has only one article in it due to article consolidation. Judgesurreal777 19:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge to Category:Star Trek ship classes otherwise the article will be orphaned. Otto4711 19:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Upmerge per Otto. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:42, 5 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was merge to Category:Star Trek ship classes AND category:Ferengi. Kbdank71 (talk) 15:36, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ferengi ship classes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Has only one article in it due to article consolidation. Judgesurreal777 19:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge to Category:Star Trek ship classes otherwise the article will be orphaned. Otto4711 19:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Agree, but Upmerge to category:Ferengi as well. - Fayenatic (talk) 01:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Upmerge per Fayenatic. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:42, 5 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 (talk) 17:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Vulcan ships (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Empty category because of article consolidation. Judgesurreal777 19:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:42, 5 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 (talk) 17:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Star Destroyers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: There is only one article left in the whole category. Judgesurreal777 19:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - sole occupant is already in the parent Category:Star Wars spaceships. Otto4711 19:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:43, 5 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 (talk) 17:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Andorian ships (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: There is all of one article in this category, and it has been prodded. Judgesurreal777 19:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - empty. Otto4711 19:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:43, 5 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 (talk) 17:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Community Server (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Eponymous

overcategorisation for a software product. Aside from the main article, the only other category member is there through an instance of company by product overcategorisation. – Black Falcon ^(Talk) 19:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:43, 5 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 (talk) 17:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Arcane series (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only contains the article of the same name and two unused templates. Too narrow to be useful. Pagrashtak 17:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:43, 5 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was keep. Kbdank71 (talk) 15:34, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Montreal Commuter Rail (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of Category:Agence métropolitaine de transport Plasma east 13:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose AMT does things other than commuter rail. Look at their website. AMT has not existed as long as commuter rail has in Montreal, so pre-AMT would not be properly categorized either. 132.205.99.122 22:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Per the above comment, I have added Category:Montreal commuter rail to Category:Agence métropolitaine de transport. The categories are not congruent; "Montreal commuter rail" is a larger subject than just the AMT. --Tkynerd (talk) 01:27, 7 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 (talk) 17:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Culture of Northwest Territories (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate of Category:Culture of the Northwest Territories Cloveious 10:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as empty (though not, at present, for 4 days) and the rest of the category structure appears to use the "the" - if not empty when closing, merge.
  Bencherlite^Talk 11:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:44, 5 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was speedy delete per author's request. {{db-author}} does the trick next time.

Category:Start-Class Northwest Territories articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category Superseded by Category:Start-Class Canadian Territories articlesI created this category Cloveious 10:39, 3 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was speedy delete, author request.

Category:WikiProject Northwest Territories articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category Superseded by Category:WikiProject Canadian Territories articles and no longer needed, I created this category Cloveious 10:34, 3 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was speedy delete, author request.

Category:Low-importance Northwest Territories articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category is superseded by Category:Low-importance Canadian Territories articles an should be deleted, I created this one. Cloveious 10:29, 3 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was speedy delete, category was emptied in May 2007 (not by author request since other editors had made changes to the category).

Category:Northwest Territories political parties (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category is a duplicate of Category:Political parties in the Northwest Territories I created this category a long time ago. Cloveious 10:21, 3 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was rename. Kbdank71 (talk) 17:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Early music performers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Rename to Category:Performers of early music, to avoid ambiguity in sub-categories, consistent with proposed renaming of Category:British early music performers. Cgingold 19:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Johnbod 03:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename for clarity, per nom. Maralia (talk) 04:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename` per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename → nom. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 02:12, 6 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was merge. British parent not renamed, as was not tagged.. Kbdank71 (talk) 15:33, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English early music performers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Proposal: Upmerge Category:English early music performers to Category:British early music performers
Rationale:

• Upmerge to Renamed Category:British performers of early music to avoid ambiguity. Johnbod 13:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Quite right, Johnbod -- I should have caught that myself. I suppose we had better rename the parent cat as well. Cgingold 18:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge, I agree--Smerus 22:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We could rename the parent for consistency, but it only becomes ambiguous with an adjective in front. Johnbod 22:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per Johnbod. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:45, 5 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was no consensus. Kbdank71 (talk) 15:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Viennese composers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Rename to Category:Viennese classical composers.
Rationale: For clarity of purpose. With

• Delete OCAT city+occupation, the category claims to contain composers "associated with" Vienna; so if U-2 plays a concert there we add Bono to the cat? and even limiting it to classical composers, we don't have an article on Viennese composers so tangential "association" seems premature on which to categorize, and appears to be in part an effort to Austrianize (or at least de-Germanize) Beethoven. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Vienna is rather a special case - we shouldn't have such cats for other cities (maybe Renaissance Venice, but that's about it). If we don't have an article on the Viennese classical tradition, then we should - there are shelf-fulls of books on the subject. It forms a rather inevitable subcat of Category:Vienna culture, which would look odd without it. Johnbod (talk) 01:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or rename, otherwise all composers who ever stayed in Vienna will be added mechanically. One possible name could be "
  Ringstrasse era Viennese composers". Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 21:44, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Suggestion: 'Viennese School composers. The term 'Viennese School' is quite specific, like 'Mannerist' or 'Minimalist'. InfernoXV (talk) 05:04, 13 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 (talk) 17:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Classicist-romantic synthesis composers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Delete - This is a clear case of overcategorization -- the category name itself reflects the overly-narrow specificity of the category. Notified creator with {{
  cfd-notify}} Cgingold 09:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete per nom. Johnbod 13:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:55, 5 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was rename. Kbdank71 (talk) 17:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:DC Comics western characters to Category:DC Comics Western characters

Nominator's rationale: Rename for consistency with parent category. Doczilla 07:41, 3 December 2007 (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 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 discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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 result of the debate was delete. Kbdank71 (talk) 17:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:TNA Champion Belts (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Duplicate category of Category:Total Nonstop Action Wrestling championships. There's no need to have two categories for the same exact thing. RobJ1981 (talk) 05:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:55, 5 December 2007 (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 appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.