Category:Miss Hong Kong prize winners
Category:Nintendo Setting articles
Category:Rival Schools characters
- 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 to
Category:Hip hop fashion. As long as the article redirects to
hip hop fashion, the category should be named that. If an article on urban fashion is written that shows significant differences, this can be reconsidered.--
Mike Selinker (
talk)
01:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:Urban fashion (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
- Nominator's rationale: Marketing term w/o clear definition, highly dependent on region and a time. As more than half of population on the planet lives in urban areas it may be hard to identify what will not eventually end up in this category. Created by a new user enriching Wikipedia with ad-like articles about fashion brands.
Urban fashion was originally redirect to
Hip hop fashion, now it points to the category.
Pavel Vozenilek (
talk)
21:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Comment. Seems potentially duplicative of
hip hop fashion. I would just leave that one personally unless someone can explain the criteria that differentiate the two. By the way, the articles this new user is adding are good and of brands/concepts that are or appear notable in urban/hip-hop fashion. I'm surprised we didn't have an article about (for example)
all over print already.
68.160.5.32 (
talk)
04:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Urban fashion is subjective and changes over time.
Carlossuarez46 (
talk)
22:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Merge or Rename Merge to
Category:Hip hop fashion or
Category:2000s fashion or rename to Street fashion or
Streetwear or "Contemporary streetwear". Several of these have no other cats & should not be orphaned.
Johnbod (
talk)
22:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Comment. The objections to the vagueness of the term
urban fashion are well taken. However, the term is commonly used as a self-description among people who are familiar with it, and is somewhat synonymous with streetwear. I chose to create urban fashion because it is the most general descriptor, in my opinion somewhat more inclusive than streetwear. I think an article entitled
urban fashion, or
contemporary urban fashion, needs to be written and
hip hop fashion should be subsumed underneath that moniker. This is because
hip hop fashion is quite clearly a part of a larger movement that includes significant contributions from other areas (such as Japanese
bricolage design) that don't necessarily identify with hip hop culture. To respond to the above deletion comment, urban fashion, like all areas of
fashion, obviously changes over time but also has a clear continuity, and anyone who spends even a cursory amount of time researching the topic (
Format Magazine,
Sneaker Freaker) will see it that it is an international and unitary design culture.
Munificentdesign (
talk)
23:59, 14 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.
Category:Phantasy Star characters
Category:Quest for Glory characters
Category:Kirby characters
Category:Farscape planets
Category:Futurama planets
Category:Nightmare Enterprises monsters
Category:Charismatic religious leaders
- 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
04:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:Charismatic religious leaders (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
- Nominator's rationale: Renominating because
previous nominator did not tag the category. Previous nominator had nominated saying "isn't this POV?"
Lquilter (
talk)
18:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
- delete - Isn't this POV? - Yes, it is. I had assumed that this would be an unfortunately ambiguous title for leaders in the
Charismatic movement, but, no; this is "religious leaders who have charismatic power" or something like that. (The definition on the category describes it as, This category contains religious leaders whose main basis of authority was or is based on charismatic authority, following Max Weber's classification of authority.) So it should be deleted, or completely redefined and renamed unambiguously to be
Category:Leaders in the charismatic religious movement. --
Lquilter (
talk)
22:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC) (reposted from prior deletion discussion; notices to previous discussants posted)
reply
- Delete mostly matches the religion section of
List of charismatic leaders as defined by Max Weber's classification of authority, which might be acceptable for a list - maybe- but certainly isn't for a category, especially without the explanation in the name. repeating my previous comment. I think bencherlite was correct not to delete an untagged category btw.
Johnbod (
talk)
19:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per Lquilter. Category would be useful if it did classify leaders of the "charismatic movement", but the current definition is POV and very subjective.
Snocrates
21:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. Almost certainly it would get misused.
Pavel Vozenilek (
talk)
23:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Delete redundant with
List of charismatic leaders as defined by Max Weber's classification of authority. It's hard enough keeping the list itself 'clean' of assertions that 'person x belongs here because I have a quote saying s/he was charismatic'.
Maralia (
talk)
21:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom, Johnbod, Lquilter...
Carlossuarez46 (
talk)
22:10, 11 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.
Category:El Cor de la Ciutat
- 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.
Angus McLellan
(Talk)
22:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:El Cor de la Ciutat (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
- Nominator's rationale: Delete - eponymous overcategorization for TV series. Material doesn't warrant the category per extensive precedent.
Otto4711 (
talk)
17:49, 10 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.
Category:Bear in the Big Blue House
Category:Metroid characters
Category:Factions in Mortal Kombat
Category:San Andreas (Grand Theft Auto)
Category:Fictional loners
- 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
04:36, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:Fictional loners (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
- Nominator's rationale: Delete wholly subjective category that cannot have any objective or non-arbitrary inclusion criteria.
Doczilla (
talk)
04:57, 10 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.
Category:Delaware State Representatives
Category:Members of the Nevada Senate
Category:Legislative branch of Oklahoma government
Category:Legislative Branch of the Government of Puerto Rico
Category:U.S. territorial lower houses by territory
Category:Speakers of state Houses of Representatives
Category:Oh My Goddess! episodes
Category:Wisconsin State Legislature
Category:Nebraska State Legislators
Category:Hawaii State Legislature
Category:Vermont Legislature
Category:Maine State Legislature
Category:Washington State Representatives
Category:Minnesota State Legislature
Category:Alaska State Legislature
Category:Delay Repay participating TOCs
- 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.
Angus McLellan
(Talk)
23:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:Delay Repay participating TOCs (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
- Delete
- Nominator's rationale: 'Delay Repay' is just the name given by some train operating companies for the clause in the National Rail Conditions of Carriage describing compensation that must be given in the event of severe delays. For this reason, every TOC must participate in 'Delay Repay', even if they don't call it that, and by that reasoning every TOC should be in this category. However, all UK TOCs are already listed
here, and if a category for them is needed, it should not be named 'Delay Repay'.
TheIslander
00:24, 10 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.