Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/User/Archive/August 2007

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories below. 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 all. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 00:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Being a member of a particular high school does not inherently foster contribution. The

Note, this nomination includes the following subcategories:

Category:Wikipedians by high school, Category:European Baccalaureate Wikipedians, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Stuyvesant High School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Burlington High School (Kansas), Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Charter School of Wilmington, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Lake Forest High School (Illinois), Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: King George V School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Cheltenham College, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Mountain View High School (Washington), Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Whitgift School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: École secondaire catholique Garneau, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Hamden Hall Country Day School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Live Oak High School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Gymea Technology High School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Bellaire High School (Bellaire, Texas). Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Innisdale Secondary School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Jesuit College Preparatory School of Dallas, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Spaulding High School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Gahr High School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Guildford Grammar School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Affton High School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Ben Davis High School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Forest Hills High School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Raleigh Charter High School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Ramaz School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: King Edward VI Grammar School (Chelmsford), Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Rolling Meadows High School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Cherokee High School, Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Marquette University High School, Category:Holland house, Category:Mildmay house, and Category:Tindal house

• Strong Delete - As those who've seen my comments in previous discussions involving these categories may remember, I oppose these alma mater categories. While college or university attended may possibly be notable (especially considering possible degrees), general education attendance doesn't seem useful to me, and seems to be more of "chat room" or even of the oft-exampled "myspace", in utility. - jc37 08:18, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - as above. Waste of a category, useless. Also, take note of the potential privacy concerns 9although i suppose it is one's choice to add themselves into a cat) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Strongly encourages social networking. There's a vague argument by some about the notion of organizing people to support various articles or groups of articles by including oneself in a category, to make yourself a resource to others. This is a pretty weak argument on the face of it. We're all Wikipedians, and that's the only school that matters. This kind of myspace-cruft is anathema to our purposes here. Removal will annoy a number of users, but it's the right thing to do. --Durin 15:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - go to myspace or facebook for your social networking needs, this is Wikipedia. --ST47Talk·Desk 15:27, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per Durin, essentially. The
  social networking/MySpace aspect is significantly greater than the limited opportunity for collaborative potential afforded by these largely single-user categories. The mere fact of attending a secondary school is little proof of an ability to contribute encyclopedically about it or an interest in it. — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete all as per Durin and ST47. There's not even much potential for collaboration in these categories; only one has more than 10 members, and a majority of them are single-editor categories (one of them is empty); all would facilitate cooperation on single articles, which can be accomplished on the school's talk page. Horologium t-c 19:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all excluding high schools that establish notability by fame.--WaltCip 20:17, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all - per above. Categorizing by high school attended does not help Wikipedia, unilike categorizing by college attended, which has much more potential to be collaborative.VegaDark (talk) 00:28, 2 September 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 below. 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 to Category:Wikipedians who understand blazon. Note that I am putting it in Category:Wikipedians interested in linguistics, because it has to go somewhere, but ultimately anyone can edit to change the parent category. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 11:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User blz (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and subcats

Suggest Merge Category:User blz, Category:User blz-1, Category:User blz-2, Category:User blz-3, and Category:User blz-5 to Category:Wikipedians interested in heraldry, a subcategory of Category:Wikipedians by interest.

Nominator's rationale: These categories are for users who speak Blazon, which is not a language so much as a jargon, relating to heraldry. It's a set of highly structured rules for describing heraldic coats of arms or flags, rather than an actual language. Additionally, "blz" is the ISO 639 classification for Balanktak, which is (yet another) Indonesian language which does not yet have a Wikipedia article. Suggest merging all of these cats into one category and moving it into Category:Wikipedians by interest, which is a more appropriate target than the languages section.

• Merge, as nom. Horologium t-c 00:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge, as nom. --Biblbroks's talk 17:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Category:Wikipedians who speak Blazon Category:Wikipedians who understand Blazon per Blazon. (Or perhaps Wikipedians who understand Blazon.) This is more specific than just an interest in heraldry. - jc37 00:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC) [Modified target per discussion below.] - jc37 10:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment I had suggested the broader scope to potentially increase the collaborative potential of the category. It is likely that all of the members of this group also share an interest in heraldry; however, there might be editors who are interested in heraldry without sharing the more narrow interest in blazon. There is no current category for heraldry in Wikipedia (I looked before I suggested creating a new category), so slightly widening the scope of the topic increases potential interest without making it too diffuse to be useful. Horologium t-c 00:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  Makes sense. My main concern is from recalling a mess we had when deleting the zodiac cats. We should try to avoid miscategorising users when renaming. And I can imagine an argument that understanding Blazon does not necessarily equal being interested in heraldry in general. - jc37 01:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I want to make sure that whatever the target cat is named, that it not include the word "speak", as it will open the door to move it back into the language cat. "Understand" is only a little better, for the same reason. I suggested "interested in" as that is the convention for all of the subcats in Category:Wikipedians by interest, which seems (to me) to be the logical place to move it. If you like Category:Wikipedians interested in Blazon, which sounds clunky to me, I'll support it, but my first choice remains the heraldry cat I suggested. Horologium t-c 20:16, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wholly agree that we shouldn't use "speak". I would prefer Wikipedians who understand... for the "almost language" cats, such as glyphs, writing systems, jargon, dialects, and such. I used to lean towards use, and even recently have wavered between use and understand, but understand seems the clearest and most

precise. - jc37 09:42, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

• Merge and keep. "speak" doesn't bother me, as it is possible to speak the descriptions aloud, but any other term would do. DGG (talk) 04:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 05:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC) ----- relisting to try to get consensus on the new name[reply]

• Comment - Ok, as I said above, I prefer Category:Wikipedians who understand Blazon. I agree with the concern about using "speak", and I oppose the use of "heraldry", and also oppose "interested in". - jc37 12:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I can support Category:Wikipedians who understand Blazon, provided it is moved out of Category:Wikipedians by language. My suggestion would to be to move it into Category:Wikipedians interested in linguistics (a subcat of Category:Wikipedians by interest, my original suggestion), but it really doesn't belong in the languages section. Its vocabulary consists entirely of words from other languages (primarily French), and it is not possible to carry out a conversation using it, essentially failing it as a language; that is why I nominated it for a rename and move in the first place. Horologium t-c 13:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge all to Category:Wikipedians who understand Blazon per Jc37 and relocate to Category:Wikipedians interested in linguistics per Horologium. — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Relocating to Category:Wikipedians by language interest might be more appropriate, or even Category:Wikipedians by constructed language (or both). But where it goes is less important than the target name atm. In any case, I agree that it shouldn't be directly in Category:Wikipedians by language. - jc37 22:38, 30 August 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 below. 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. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 18:16, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Wikipedians who support Crewe Alex to Category:Wikipedian Crewe Alexandra F.C. fans

Nominator's rationale: Per the convention of Category:Wikipedian football (soccer) team fans. – Black Falcon ^(Talk) 03:41, 28 August 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 below. 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. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 19:06, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who support pure wiki deletion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Wikipedia is

• Delete as nom and per precedent. — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It's basically a petition, not a category. There are better ways to do that. - Richfife 20:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Linked article is to a meta discussion that has been around for years, and will never become policy. Divisive. Horologium t-c 21:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - as per all three of the above. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep - This doesn't a support/oppose a current policy, and it's a semi-active discussion. (As opposed to the several discussions linked in the nom for examples.) I think using a category for an active discussion should be fine. It would be hard to argue how this doesn't facilitate collaboration, as we do collaborate on policies and such. The reason for the Weak keep however, is that the discussion is only semi-active, and could almost be tagged [[tl|historical}}. - jc37 12:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I took another look at the article linked by the cat (Pure wiki deletion). The last edit to that page was in July 2006, so it's not really even semi-active at this point. (The last comment on the talk page was in April 2007). More relevant to this community, however, is the link at the top of the article page, to en:Wikipedia:Pure wiki deletion system, which is a Rejected Proposal. (Discussion there was much more active and recent, ending when the discussion was marked as rejected in June 2007.) Without getting into a debate on the merits (or lack thereof) of this proposal, it was rejected, and having a category of users who support a rejected proposal seems (to me) to be both pointless and unnecessarily divisive. The userbox is sufficient to express support of the issue. (One can construct an argument that it too is divisive, but this is not the appropriate forum to discuss deletion of the userbox.) Horologium t-c 14:09, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Changing to delete, since the page has been inactive for a few months. (I might dispute the "rejected" tag, but that would be about the page, not the category.) - jc37 22:34, 30 August 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 speedily deleted by

Category:Users (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Delete, as duplicate of Category:Wikipedians. -- Prove It ^(talk) 15:13, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete, as recreated deleted content. See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 November 4#Category:User Category:Users. This category was deleted as all-encompassing and redundant to Category:Wikipedians. It was recreated yesterday. Horologium t-c 15:31, 26 August 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 below. 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. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 09:52, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians not active on weekdays (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: I can't think a single reason on why someone could look for Wikipedias not being active on weekdays. If they want to see a specific person that is he/she active on weekdays, a quick look on the userpage is enough. No category is necessary. ~Iceshark7 08:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - This is simply a notice. Notes, or even template notes are fine, but not a category. - jc37 09:42, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom and jc37. Horologium t-c 19:27, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per above. If you're not available on weekdays, say so. No reason to join a group. - Richfife 20:50, 27 August 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 below. 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. — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

mouse, a keyboard, and a myriad of other input devices. And we can't leave out all the various Writing implements. Categories for everything. : ) - jc37 09:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete - as nominator. - jc37 09:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unhelpful categorization. - Koweja 10:59, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as makes no difference to one's abilities or actions here what type of computer one uses,
  SqueakBox 19:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Weak Delete. We went through a big dustup over the Mac categories (which were retained after some pruning); the PC cats (by processor type) are up for deletion right now. I hate to use
  WP:OTHERSTUFF because it's deprecated, but some sort of balance is in order. If this (and the AMD and Intel cats) are deleted, I would suggest deleting the whole parent Category:Wikipedians by personal computer, which would consist solely of the Mac and its subcats. Those cats could be moved to Category:Wikipedians by interest as Category:Wikipedians interested in Macintosh computers or something similar. There are some differences between a Tablet PC and other computers beyond the obvious interface issues; different operating systems comes to mind immediately. Horologium t-c 19:40, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  A clearer version of my proposal for the Mac cat: create a new category in Category:Wikipedians by interest entitled Category:Wikipedians interested in Macintosh computers, and make Category:Wikipedians who use Macintosh computers a subcategory of the new cat. Note that this will be moot if the AMD/Intel cats survive AFD. Horologium t-c 04:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  This is more in the line of using a tool. Compare to Wikipedians who:

  1. drive
     automobiles
  2. ride bicycles
  3. use shovels
  4. shoot guns
  5. eat with a spoon
  6. use a comb or brush
  7. wear shoes
  8. sit in chairs
  9. use ladders
  10. etc.

  These are generic items that potentially anyone might use. We may have articles on the objects, but such categories have the potential of being "all-inclusive" (especially in a post-industrial age world of mass production). And the usefulness for insight into research is dubious. Incidentally, such generic objects (as opposed to more specific objects) are also the most likely targets of an "interested in" category, since an action with the object in question doesn't provide much more of a unique notworthy experience than just being interested in the object in question. (As opposed to works of art/media in which experiencing them can be notable - such as a book, a painting, a sculpture, a video game, a radio programme, or whatever.) If we were allowing Wikipedian categories for anything with an article, then it might be justified, but the current concensus seems to be to minimise "user cats" to more specific, and less general, subjects/objects. As for Mac users, it's a specific brand of computer, rather than just a "generic" PC. We shouldn't have any of the myriad brands of IBM compatible PC clones, but individual, more specific computers such as the Macintosh would seem to make sense. (I am not opposed to the discussion being moved to the talk page, if wished.) - jc37 10:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  My concern is that we will end up with a similar situation to what occurred with the deletion of

  Wikipedia:User categories for discussion/Archive/April 2007#Category:Wikipedians who use personal computers.) If nothing else, delete the parent cat, and move the Mac category up, although in any case, there will be repeated efforts to create a PC-based equivalent to the Mac category. Horologium t-c 15:12, 26 August 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 moved to

Category:Files uploaded by User:Jeff G. (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Suggest Delete This category contains one page and one picture. I also do not believe it is appropriate to categorize articles/images based on who uploaded them. User are free to create a list in their user space.-Andrew c ^[talk] 01:00, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment This should be discussed at
  Wikipedia:Categories for Discussion, not here. This is for user categories, found under Category:Wikipedians. Horologium t-c 01:11, 22 August 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 } moved to

Category:User galleries (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Suggest Delete This category contains one page and one subpage (nominated also for deletion above). This category is redundant with Category:User page galleries, a nd the one article in this category isn't even a "gallery" so no sense in merging.-Andrew c ^[talk] 01:00, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment This should be discussed at
  Wikipedia:Categories for Discussion, not here. This is for user categories, found under Category:Wikipedians. Horologium t-c 01:11, 22 August 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 below. 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 all. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 02:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User cg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and subcats

Category:User iš (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and subcat

Suggest Delete Category:User cg, Category:User cg-1, Category:User cg-2, Category:User cg-3, Category:User cg-4, Category:User cg-N, Category:User iš, and Category:User iš-N

Nominator's rationale: These separately created categories (which overlap) are for speakers of Montenegrin language, which is simply Serbian spoken in Montenegro (which recently divorced Serbia). There is no ISO 639 classification for Montenegrin, and (according to the Montenegrin language article) the official language of the country is Serbian. I would suggest deletion of these categories until some official recognition of the language is developed. (Preferably an ISO categorization, but right now even the government of Montenegro does not recognize Montenegrin as its own language.) "cg" and "iš" are not valid ISO 639 categorizations.

• Delete all as nom. Horologium t-c 00:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom. At least the existence of ISO code for Montenegrin language should be the requirement for the category to be revived. --Biblbroks's talk 16:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom. There's really not much to add I think :) -- Outspan [talk · contribs] 17:24, 22 August 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 below. 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. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 10:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User fjh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Suggest rename Category:User fjh to Category:User hif

Nominator's rationale: This is a category for Fiji Hindi, a variant of Hindi spoken on Fiji. The category notes that fjh is not an ISO 639 classification. "hif" is the correct ISO 639-3 classification for this language.

• Rename, as nom. Horologium t-c 00:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename, as nom. --Biblbroks's talk 16:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename Cheers, JetLover ^(talk) 00:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom to standardise with the remaining Babel cats, almost all of which use ISO 639 codes. — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:29, 27 August 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 below. 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. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 10:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User ye (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and subcat

Suggest Delete Category:User ye and Category:User ye-3

Nominator's rationale: These two cats are for speakers of

Yinglish, which DOES have its own ISO 639-3 classification of "yib". (Ethnologue notes that Yinglish is a second language only, as all of its speakers also speak English. Just trying to head off the creation of Category:User yib-N.) I'd suggest a rename, but looking at the Talk:Yinglish and Talk:Yeshivish

makes me think again. (The heated debate in there made me pull this cat out of the group nomination below, because I suspect it will generate a lot more discussion than those). I think it might be better to nuke this unrecognized cat, and leave open the possbility of creating some "yib" cats, possibly merging together the two articles under the "Yinglish" banner (although the Yeshivish article is far superior in quality, it doesn't have the international seal of approval of Yinglish).

• Delete as nom. Horologium t-c 00:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as nom. No official recognition, as in the case of Category:User cg and its subcats, is a reason strong enough. The creation of Category:User yib could sort things up in the future. --Biblbroks's talk 20:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as a perfectly real and important dialect in NYC. The article in WP may be based on a single book, & the word may even have been invented, but the term & the dialect (or whatever) is now in widespread use. There are many more sources. There are also a good number of WPedians who could usefully describe themselves here. Yinglish is a great deal more general--a great many people speak it to some extent, most of whom are way too secular to even understand what Yeshivish is about. There is a serious need for collaboration in articles related to these subjects. I'd support keeping the levels--there are adepts who use it every day, and people who just understand a little. DGG (talk) 04:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete Weak delete. The usefulness of the Babel cats comes not from the ability to speak a language but from the ability to translate it (at least as far as collaboration on en.wikipedia goes). Since this is not an ISO-recognised language, I think we should avoid setting a precedent for allowing inclusion of any thousands of constructed languages. I'm hesitant to try to draw a connection between the ability to speak a language and an encyclopedically-relevant interest in the language. — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changed to delete after re-reading the nomination and seeing that Yeshivish is "not an ISO-recognized language". — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 20:56, 27 August 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 below. 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 depopulate for repurposing. Admin will depop, expecting that nominator or other users will take care of the repurposing/renaming/etc. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 05:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User als (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and subcats

(Note: These categories have not been flagged for deletion/merge/rename, because I was unable to determine the appropriate flag. Suggestions would be appreciated.)

Suggest depopulate and rename as Tosk Albanian, not Alemannic.

Nominator's rationale:This is a textbook example of why some type of standard should be applied to naming cats. "als" is the ISO 639-3 classification for Tosk Albanian, spoken in Albania (naturally). However, none of these cats have anything to do with Albanian. Instead, they are for Alemannic German, which has four separate ISO 639-3 classifications, of which it appears that all four have been mixed together and tossed into another language's spot. Since there are over 130 people in these seven categories (yes, there is a -0 cat), my suggestion would be to depopulate them, recreate them as Albanian Tosk categories (to prevent their recreation as Alemannic cats) and have the users create appropriate cats under the four Alemannic language groups (of which it is likely that one will never be used—it's a classification for an Venezuelan variant), and it's probable that most of them will want GSW (Schweizerdeutsch, or Swiss German). The category description specifically mentions all four variations of Alemannic, so it's not obvious which flavor each user wanted when they grabbed the userbox, and simply renaming the cats as "gsw" cats might put some people in the wrong cat. I also would suggest deletion of the asinine Category:User als-0, which somehow was missed in the earlier purge of -0 cats.

• Depopulate and rename as nom. Horologium t-c 00:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep until this below is resolved:
  • Comment How does one depopulate the category? Manually remove all the 100+ users from the category (by removing the userboxes from their userpages) or how? But more importantly: shouldn't the category be tagged with the {{cfr-user}} (Template:cfr-user) template? --Biblbroks's talk 20:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A bot can go in and remove all users from the category easily enough. The reason it's not tagged (as noted at the top of the nomination) is because I'm not sure how to tag these for my proposal. The cats are not being renamed, merged, or deleted, they're getting emptied and repurposed or recycled. The cats are not going away, they are just going to be used for something different than what they are being used for now. If you have a suggestion of what template to use for that, I'm open to suggestions. Horologium t-c 20:42, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So if I understand correctly all the users from the category would lose their babel userboxes for als and have none instead - no other supstitute like gsw? If the answer is yes, I will change my vote to Depopulate and rename as nom. --Biblbroks's talk 21:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This will not affect the userbox, only the category. The userbox deletion would have to be discussed at TfD, as it's a template. (No userboxes are removed through UCfD actions.) If this is approved, I will submit a TfD for the template (rather than a simple repurpose) because it's tied to the Alemmanic category. However, I shouldn't submit a TfD until this is approved; the actions need to be sequential. For all of the renames, I will go through and fix the userboxes associated with them by renames, but I haven't decided if I should submit the userboxes for deleted cats for deletion as well. I'm a lot more tolerant of nonsense on user pages, as long as it stays out of the categorization section. Horologium t-c 21:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - neutral to the discussion. When proposing a cat for CfD discussion, and unsure which tag to use, typically just default to the "cfd" one. In this case cfd-user. Navigation and alerting those who may be interested by the tagging is the more important aspect. - jc37 23:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone ahead and flagged all seven cats with {{cfd-user}}. That should settle that issue. Horologium t-c 23:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Ok. And since the tagging occurred on the same day, I don't see a reason to relist either. - jc37 09:42, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Depopulate and rename as nom. It has been resolved. I hope that the delay, which I have created with bureaucratic issues, will help clear potential confusion with similar actions in the future. It helped me. :-) --Biblbroks's talk 17:48, 24 August 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 below. 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 all. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 10:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User jer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and subcat

Category:User hess (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and subcats

Category:User portunhol (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Suggest Delete Category:User jer and Category:User jer-1

Nominator's rationale: These two categories are for speakers of

Benue-Congo languages

family (part of the Kainji family, which is still redlinked).

Suggest Delete Category:User hess, Category:User hess-1, Category:User hess-2, Category:User hess-3, and Category:User hess-N.

Nominator's rationale: These four cats are for speakers of

Hessian, a dialect of German spoken in the state of Hesse

. This is not an ISO-recognized language, and it has no official status anywhere. The names of the cats are inconsistent with the parent category's naming conventions as well.

Suggest Delete Category:User portunhol

Nominator's rationale: This is for

Portunhol, a mixed language

of Portuguese and Spanish, spoken along the border of Brazil and Uruguay. This is not an ISO-recognized langauge, and it has no official status anywhere. As with the "hess" categories above, the category's name is inconsistent with the parent category's naming conventions.

• Delete all, as nom. Horologium t-c 00:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all, as nom. --Biblbroks's talk 20:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete none Redirect Hessian to Deutsche. Two redirections for Jer: en or fr. Two redirections for portunhol: es or Portuguese (pt?). BrewJay 01:08, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Hess Germanic languages fit into ISO-8859-1, much like Ebonics, and isn't the name of the province close enough? [email protected] 17:06, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Hessian is not a recognized variant of German, much as (recently deleted) New Yorkese is not a recognized variant of English. There may be a few minor pronunciation differences, and a few words that are local in origin and usage, but it's the same language. There is no ISO recognition, and the convention in Category:Wikipedians by language is to limit the categories to recognized languages. There are several thousand ISO 639-3 classifications, including roughly 20 variations of German (see Ethnologue's report on Germany, which includes ISO 639-3 references to all the listed languages; "Hessian" is listed under "German".) Hessian has no official recognition or acknowledgment in Germany or anywhere else. The same holds true for Jèrriais and Portunhol, all of which use standard Latin characters (well, Hessian has ß, which is usually included in character sets), which addresses your first concern. Horologium t-c 17:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see that deletion is still an error. The appropriate thing seems to be redirecting Hessian to German and forcing them to apply to the ISO for recognition. The choice for Jerrais and Jersey, though, is a fork. Either French or Anglais. I see no compelling reason not to accept this convention. A lot of people of these crosstalk languages will choose both.BrewJay 01:08, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom. The usefulness of the language categories lies in the ability to translate information. When two dialects are mutually comprehensible, there is no need to have separate categories for both of them. Minor differences in speech in different provinces, districts, cities, or neighbourhoods are interesting for study, but do not need to be captured by individual user categories. Such overcategorisation only serves to reduce the usefulness and navigability of the general "Wikipedians by langugage" categorisation scheme. Moreover, since templates and categories have stringent and specific naming conventions, redirects are generally not necessary. — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 02:43, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen this question come up. (I've seen "law" under "fake languages", somewhere). No, it isn't a language of its own. It's "Latin", and Doctors might appreciate being in that same category with Lawyers, so if the category comes up again, then I think it should be redirected, because they deal with each other and sometimes they can converse in person with this stuff. I translate it to plain English where I can. Hear the word "Jargon" carefully. I think someone made that sound foreign to Ingglish. I would call the category "Latin Jargon", but it's a dead language that doesn't change, because people don't use it, unless they want a static, but portable name for something (like a precedent or a disease), AND I'm wary of creating categories under wikipedians by language. I'm glad there's a constructed language category. Hmmm. Nah. I'd hav to write and promote a dictionary. Webster had to take back some of his revisions. I don't. BrewJay 00:48, 27 August 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 below. 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 all. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 05:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User ke (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and subcats

Suggest Merge Category:User ke to Category:User grc, Category:User ke-1 to Category:User grc-1, Category:User ke-2 to Category:User grc-2, and Category:User ke-3 to Category:User grc-3.

Nominator's rationale: These categories are for speakers of Koine Greek, a slightly "younger" version of Ancient Greek. Ethnologue classifies it as a variant of Ancient Greek, which has the ISO 639-3 classification of "grc". "ke" is not a valid ISO classification. Suggest merging all of the ke cats into their equivalent grc cats. Alternatively, delete all of them.

• Merge or Delete, as nom. Horologium t-c 00:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge, as nom. --Biblbroks's talk 20:39, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete oppose merge, since that wasn't the creator's intent. The users involved can always add themselves to grc. - jc37 23:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete without meging per Jc37. It's always easier for a user to self-categorise than for others to remove a category, so we should err on the side of under-interpreting any possible similarities. — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:23, 27 August 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. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Clusty (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This category for users of a particular search engine

• Delete as nom and per precedent. — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom and precedent. Horologium t-c 00:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per deletions re google etc,
  SqueakBox 17:16, 22 August 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 both. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having a particular processor in your computer does not foster your contribution in any way. ^