May 6
Category:Ethnic Hungarian politicians outside of Hungary
- 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:People of Hungarian descent.
Conscious
11:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:Ethnic Hungarian politicians outside of Hungary (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete This is overcategorisation based on a slight connection. The new President of France is in almost as many Hungarian categories as French categories, which is just silly. He should be in one at most (none would be fine as well, as having a Hungarian immigrant father is of little relevance to his public career), and if this one is deleted, he will still be in two. The same sort of thing applies in other cases.
Brandon97
22:21, 6 May 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:Fictional band members
-
Category:Fictional band members to
Category:Fictional musicians
- 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.
Conscious
11:08, 15 May 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:Bob Weir songs
- 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:Songs by Bob Weir.
Conscious
11:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:Bob Weir songs to
Category:Grateful Dead songs
- Merge, I think it would be a good idea to merge
Category:Bob Weir songs into
Category:Grateful Dead songs. There's only one article in the Bob Weir category --
Born Cross-Eyed. I don't see a big benefit from breaking down Grateful Dead songs by who wrote them, especially since some of them were group efforts anyway. Merging Bob Weir songs into Grateful Dead songs would tidy things up a bit.
-- Mudwater
21:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Rename, do not merge - rename to
Category:Songs by Bob Weir per the convention of
Category:Songs by composer. The "X songs" construction is for songs performed by, not songs written by.
Otto4711
21:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Rename per Otto's convincing argument. So, now I'd better take care of "Songs by..." for the more famous pop and rock composers, sigh... --
kingboyk
22:09, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Rename per Otto.
Johnbod
22:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Rename to
Category:Songs by Bob Weir per Otto, since we have difft naming conventions for the two hierarchies. --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
08:24, 7 May 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:Redirects for names
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: rename. BHG is right: the category shouldn't be deleted unless the template is. But it should be named to match the template.--
Mike Selinker
05:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Propose renaming
Category:Redirects for names to
Category:Redirects from sort names
- Nominator's Rationale: Rename, To better describe the category's contents. Alternatively, I'd be perfectly happy with an outcome of Delete; this category (and template, and the redirects herein) seem pretty useless to me. Given that we have some 300,000 biographies and only 66 pages in this category it would seem that the general populace haven't found it useful either.
kingboyk
21:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Delete-redirects are automatic and seamless, and having a category to list these automatically seems useless. --
MChew
17:32, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Redirects from New York City area bus labels
Category:Star formation
- 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.
Conscious
11:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:Star formation (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete — Category had a single page entry and a template. These have been relocated to the Stellar evolution template. Even the main article page for the category was not categorized under this name. The
Category:Stellar evolution only has 29 members, so deleting this sub-category shouldn't cause any heartburn.
RJH (
talk)
20:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Keep - I do not think that mixing articles on star formation and protostellar objects with articles on the end state of stars is appropriate. Several of the articles in
Category:Stellar evolution, such as
pre-main sequence star,
T Tauri star,
Hayashi track, and
Herbig-Haro object, could be appropriately placed in
Category:Star formation. Moreover, I am sure other articles that are not yet written (
Schmidt law,
star formation indicator) would be more appropriate for
Category:Star formation than
Category:Stellar evolution. Star formation is also a major field of research in astronomy (and one of my specialties).
Dr. Submillimeter
22:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Keep - per Dr S. Gotta go with the expert on this one.
Otto4711
22:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Neutral. I won't pretend to understand anything about stars, so I am happy to go along with Dr S's view unless another expert pops up. We're lucky that we have an astronomer in the house :) --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
22:40, 10 May 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:Shared IP cats
Category:Pages with special 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 delete --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
03:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:Pages with special characters (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete. Now empty (except for the below cat). Formerly was populated by a template, but is no longer. Everything else that was in the category was recently deleted. No need for this self-reference. ---
RockMFR
17:05, 6 May 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:Articles containing Indic text
Category:Websites running the LiveJournal engine
Category:Jericho Images
Category:Kyle XY
- 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 nomination withdrawn --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
06:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
:Propose renaming
Category:Kyle XY to
Category:Kyle XY characters
Nominator's Rationale: Rename - everything in the category except the show's article is an article on a character.
Otto4711
14:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
Withdrawn - looks like this will end up in favor of having someone do extra work so rather than wait for that outcome to get ratified I'll just go ahead and do the extra work.
Otto4711
21:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Create new category for characters - there are other articles about the show that i've found that weren't included in the category but now I've added them.
eLLe.Le
00:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Keep - added back main articles into category (which he removed on the 6th with no discussion, and never mentioned he did so in the nom :\...)
Matthew
07:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- As I've now said twice, the articles are for episodes and are categorized under
Category:Kyle XY episodes. Even if this category isn't renamed, the same article should not be categorized under two different Kyle XY categories. So the choices for getting the character articles into a proper characters category are to create a spanking new category and move all of the character articles into it (which would incidentally leave this category virtually empty and rife for deletion) or we could simply rename the one that already has all of the character articles in it to reflect that and stop adding the articles that are in
Category:Kyle XY episodes back to it.
Otto4711
12:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
-
-
- Keep - there is sufficient content and, as this is a current series with a new season beginning in June, plenty of room for growth.
Tim!
06:31, 11 May 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:The 10th Kingdom
- 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 --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
15:49, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:The 10th Kingdom (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete - nothing left in the cat after creating and populating the characters subcat but that subcat and the article on the show. No need for this category for navigation.
Otto4711
14:50, 6 May 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:8th & Ocean
- 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 --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
18:25, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:8th & Ocean (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete - category contains the article on the show and the modeling agency from the show. These two articles are easily interlinked and the category is not needed for navigational purposes.
Otto4711
14:35, 6 May 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:7th Heaven
- 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.
A simple headcount would suggest "no consensus" (3 !votes each way), but CfD is not a vote. The arguments to delete cite precedent and (implicitly)
WP:OCAT#Small_with_no_potential_for_growth and
WP:OCAT#Eponymous_categories_for_people, whereas reasons for the "keep" !votes are one
WP:USEFUL and Kingboyk's dislike of
WP:OCAT#Small_with_no_potential_for_growth. A guideline is not set in stone, but is supposed to be followed with the "occasional exception"; disliking the guideline may be grounds for seeking a change in the guideline, but it is not a reason to disregard the guideline in any individual case. So the deletes have it. --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
09:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:7th Heaven (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete - after the recategorization of various articles to the appropriate subcats, the remaining material is insufficient to warrant the category. All of the material is easily interlinked through the main article on the show.
Otto4711
14:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Keep Contains 3 correctly categorised articles and 2 subcategories. That's plenty, and these container categories help with navigation imho. --
kingboyk
21:14, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Comment - A similar number of articles and subcats were deemed insufficient to require categories for
Three's Company,
Bo' Selecta!,
American Dad!,
Jackass,
The Black Donneleys,
Medium and others. And to save a certain someone the trouble, yes the recent nomination for
American Dragon: Jake Long resulted in "keep" but the trend in recent nominations has been away from eponymous categories in the absence of a substantial amount of material that can't be easily interlinked and otherwise categorized. Since all of these articles can be easily interlinked and in fact are interlinked through a navtemplate, and since there's nothing that isn't already well-categorized elsewhere, there's no need for the category.
Otto4711
21:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Fine, but I disagree with that trend. I find eponymous categories helpful and logical, and 3 articles and 2 subcategories to be quite enough. Cheers. --
kingboyk
21:58, 6 May 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:3rd Rock from the Sun
- 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 --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
09:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:3rd Rock from the Sun (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete - Other than the show's article, everything in the category is an improperly categorized cast/crew article. The category is not needed for navigation and is unlikely to grow.
Otto4711
14:20, 6 May 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:The Critic
- 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.
Conscious
11:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:The Critic (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete - in the absence of the improperly categorized articles on cast and crew, all that would remain is the article on the show and on a Simpsons ep where the main character appeared. Small category with no likelihood of growth, category not needed for navigational purposes.
Otto4711
14:14, 6 May 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:Romantic interests of Elliott Smith
Category:Australian test cricketers killed in action
- 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.
Conscious
11:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Propose renaming
Category:Australian test cricketers killed in action to
Category:Cricketers killed in action
- Nominator's Rationale: Rename, I doubt this could be expanded in the future (I hope not, anyway!), and it only contains one article at the moment. Rename and add in
Jasper Vinall for one.
Lugnuts
10:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Upmerge to
Category:Australian test cricketers. (the sole article,
Tibby Cotter, is already in
Category:Australian military personnel killed in World War One). The intersection between cricketers and war dead might make an interesting list, but is not notable enough to justify a category
Category:Cricketers killed in action. What next?
Category:Killed in action by conflict sub-categorised by every occupation and hobby? --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
10:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Comment apologies, I didn't read Cotter's full article and took the word action to mean actually playing a game of cricket! But my original point still stands of renaming the cat to include any one unfortunent enough to actually die/by killed in a game of cricket, as per J. Vinall.
Lugnuts
11:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Reply: I think that the phrase "killed in action" usually refers to military action, but the category creator didn't make the intent clear, so the confusion is understandable. However, a category of crickets killed while playing cricket seems a bit excessive when it only has one identified potential member. Have you any information to suggest that there are more otherwise notable cricketers killed during a game? --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
13:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Upmerge per BHG. I would guess there's a category out there already for sportspeople killed while playing their sport and I can't imagine it's so large as to require subdivision by sport.
Otto4711
14:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Merge into
Category:Australian cricketers - This obtuse category is for Australian cricket players who were killed while serving in the military (not while playing cricket, as I first thought). This is an example of a "narrow intersection" as defined at
Wikipedia:Overcategorization. The intersection is not only narrow but also trivial, and the category should be deleted.
Dr. Submillimeter
22:09, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Whatever you do, do not merge into
Category:Australian cricketers as he is in it already, as well as being in the test cricket subcategory. However he was not in the category for his state side (
Category:New South Wales cricketers), so I have added him to that.
Mowsbury
11:18, 7 May 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:Municipalities in Arauca
Category:Quality Guru
- Propose renaming
Category:Quality Guru to
Category:Quality experts
- 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.
Conscious
11:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Nominator's Rationale: Rename: capitalization and style.
Sumahoy
01:34, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Keep: It's an industry standard term, it would seem very odd to change to the generic and unused term "experts". My example would be "Philip Crosby's Reflections on Quality: 295 Inspirations from the World's Foremost Quality Guru"; if Crosby calls himself a Quality Guru this seems to prove the point.
Ashley VH
07:11, 6 May 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:Enderverse novels and short stories
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was: rename to
Category:Ender's Game series novels. A rename is clearly favored by everyone, and Enderverse does seem to be a fan construction, so I went with what I believe to be the least controversial option.--
Mike Selinker
05:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Propose renaming
Category:Enderverse novels and short stories to
Category:Enderverse novels
- Nominator's Rationale: Rename. This used to cover both novels and short stories, but now that I've merged them into
List of Enderverse short stories and
First Meetings, this just covers novels. The category should be changed to appropriately reflect this.
hbdragon88
01:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Rename - per nom ::
Kevinalewis :
(Talk Page)/
(Desk)
14:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Rename to
Category:Ender's Game series to match the main article,
Ender's Game series, or to
Category:Ender's Game series novels, and rename
Category:Enderverse to
Category:Ender's Game series, if two separate cats are strictly necessary. (Necessity of the novels themselves I'd best remain silent on.)
Alai
00:51, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Comment rename the article to
Enderverse
132.205.44.134
16:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Rename to
Category:Enders Game series novels and short stories, or delete or do something to get rid of the horrible and obscure neologism "Enderverse", which has absolutely no currency outside of a very small subset of hard-core fans.
Xtifr
tälk
01:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Gay Nazis
- 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.
Conscious
11:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:Gay Nazis (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Possibly created in bad faith (see the usernames of the two users that created it). This category is not particularly encyclopedic, though not nearly as bad as the next one. --
BigDT
01:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per
Wikipedia:Overcategorization#Non-notable_intersections_by_ethnicity.2C_religion.2C_or_sexual_preference.
Doczilla
06:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Delete as unverifiable; as the article on
Ernst Röhm illustrates, there seems to be a lack of robust evidence about homeosexuality amongst the Nazis. Plenty of thorough analysis of a homoerotic current in Nazi imagery, but less on the individuals, which would leave the category imbalanced. I'm sure that there is plenty of scope for an article on the subject, but given the difficulties in sourcing, I can't see how a category can work. --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
07:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per BrownHairedGirl
Sleep On It
21:10, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Delete invalid intersection, no article
Gay Nazis exists nor likely could it (in part due to the problems flagged by BrownHairedGirl).
Carlossuarez46
00:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Delete nothing special about a Nazi who's gay any more than a Nazi with a Slav or Jewish ancestor. No categories for such.
Bulldog123
11:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Reply. I strongly disagree with Bulldog123. Nazi persecution of gay people is a well-documented and notorious subject, so this is a very significant intersection between the persecuted and the persecutor, comparable in some ways to "Jewish Nazis". Only the sourcing problem above prevent me from recommending a "strong keep". --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
03:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Keep Why have lots of gay categories but not this one, unless one wants to pretend that gays don't do bad things?
Mowsbury
11:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
- Would you care to explain why all positive connotations for LGBT/gay people seem to be considered notable, yet all negative connotations are considered non-notable? It seems to me that the categorisation in this field is utterly and deliberately biased.
Mowsbury
13:10, 12 May 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:Gay Neo-Nazis
- 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.
Conscious
11:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:Gay Neo-Nazis (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Possibly created in bad faith (see the usernames of the two users that created it). This category is horribly unencyclopedic and has already been used for vandalism. --
BigDT
01:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- So why are categories like
Category:Jewish American actors allowed, then?
Unknown Unknowns
09:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- In theory I could make
Homosexuality and Neo-Nazism, just like we have
Homosexuality and Zoroastrianism or
Homosexuality and Voodoo. I'm not going to do it mind you, but I think it could be done just as plausibly as those were done.--
T. Anthony
10:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Right, and most - if not all - of the contents of that article would be about Neo-Nazi attacks on homosexuals, so again the intersection is not valid because it would not be about gay neo-Nazis.
Carlossuarez46
19:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Similar could be said about
Category:LGBT Muslims, not that Islam is the same as Neo-Nazism. However no form of Islam, that I'm aware of, accepts homosexuality. The way of things at present seems to indicate LGBT people in groups that hate them is also relevant. That outlook might be deeply flawed, but it's how things go at present.--
T. Anthony
20:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
- Read the article
Al-Fatiha Foundation and the references/links there, and one's awareness may grow. :-)
Carlossuarez46
20:03, 8 May 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:Sleeper Cell (TV series)
- 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 --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
09:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
reply
-
Category:Sleeper Cell (TV series) (
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs)
Delete - small category, little or no potential for growth. The material is all easily interlinked through the main article. Category is not needed for navigational purposes.
Otto4711
00:50, 6 May 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.