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 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:Survival horror films
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.
Nominator's rationale: Delete This is a category of a genre I have never heard applied to films. There is no definition of the genre in the category, there is no article for it, and browsing through google only related
Survival horror to video games. Not films. I propose we delete this category.
Andrzejbanas (
talk)
22:29, 19 February 2012 (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:Destruction
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.
Nominator's rationale:Rename or Delete or clarify the introduction or split. Not sure if this is the correct name or if a better introduction would help. Deletion is a valid alternative. The current introduction states This category deals with the partial or total annihilation of entities. I'm not sure that is clear and objective. In any case from looking at the contents, what do
road debris,
paper shredder,
shelf life,
weapons,
wear and tear and
lost works have defining in common?
Vegaswikian (
talk)
20:40, 19 February 2012 (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:Free public outdoor meals
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 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:Cummins College of Engineering for Women
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 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:Wikipedians by Clan: Clan Elliot
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.
Nominator's rationale: This user category tries to encompass a category hierarchy in its name, a practice which is deprecated by
WP:NCCAT: Don't write the category structure in names. Example: "Monarchs", not "People - Monarchs".A
search reveals no other Wikipedians-by-clan categories, and while the simplest naming format would be
Category:Clan Elliot Wikipedians, the convention of
Category:Wikipedians is for "Wikipedian(s)" to be first word in the title. Any suggestions?
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
12:56, 19 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete – we don't categorise bios by clan (or by family or by surname, apart from a few exceptions) so I don't see why we should classify wikipedians by clan. And there is no
Category:Clan Elliot anyway. (The name seems a reasonable extrapolation from the 'alma mater' example.)
Oculi (
talk)
19:59, 19 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete per Oculi; and in response to BHG's original question: the alma mater user categories are the only ones, as far as I know, which follow that format. The reason that format was chosen several years ago was to bypass naming issues concerning 'Wikipedian alumni of Foo' versus 'Wikipedian Foo alumni' or 'Wikipedian Foo pupils' versus 'Wikipedian Old Fooians', and so on. -- Black Falcon(
talk)21:24, 22 February 2012 (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:RPOTD articles
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 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:The Brier
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.
Strong oppose This has had many title sponsors, but is referred to as "The Brier". There's even several books about "The Brier". The category should be inclusive and not exclusive of Briers not sponsored by Tim Hortons. Since the Labatt Brier is the title sponsor form for more Briers than Tim Hortons, the usage of sponsor names when not necessary is less accurate, and less concise than the category should be.
70.24.251.71 (
talk)
07:05, 20 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Given that there are 2 (out of a possible 48) Macdonald Brier, 13 (out of a possible 21) Labatt Brier, 4 Nokia Brier and 9 Tim Hortons Brier articles it would not really be a useful rename. What happens if after 2013 Tim Hortons no longer sponsor the Brier? Will the category then be renamed again? A better idea would be to sub-categorise the Brier by sponsors. You would then have four sub-categories by sponsor. As to the
Category:Brier champions, did all 71 people play in the Tim Hortons sponsored brier? If not then sub-categorise them as well.
CambridgeBayWeather (
talk)
09:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Categorisation should follow the
WP:COMMONNAME, which may include the sponsor's name, but in this case does not. There have been two formal move discussions at
Talk:Tim Hortons Brier: one in
2005 which reached no consensus, and one in
2006 with only 3 !votes If a further discussion establishes a consensus for a particular name, then I'll support aligning the category name to that choice, but for now "the Brier" looks like the right choice. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
13:30, 20 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose. The category is for the full history of The Brier, regardless of who sponsored any particular year's bonspiel. Timmie's has only sponsored The Brier since 2005. PKT(alk)13:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose. The category is different from the event article. The category will encompass all of the events, while the article should be at the event's current name. --
Earl Andrew -
talk14:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose as well. I note that many major US football college bowl main articles and categories do not follow the name of the current sponsor, and certainly the Brier's history long predates Tim's. It's different than the Scott's/Scottie's Tournament of Hearts, which was created by Scott Paper.
Shawn in Montreal (
talk)
16:12, 20 February 2012 (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:Arrests of journalists
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 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:Dorchester, New Brunswick
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete per
WP:SMALLCAT. With a population of 1,167, I don't believe this village has the potential for growth to merit an eponymous category. I also don't believe there's any exception to
WP:OC for settlements. Based on what I've seen in
Category:Villages in Canada, this does seem to be OCAT: there is but one other eponymous village category,
Category:Stirling, Alberta, and it is a populated place that is a
National Historic Site of Canada, along with Quebec City and Louisbourg, and does not offer a precedent for the nominated category.
Shawn in Montreal (
talk)
00:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. While any populated place, regardless of size, can have such a category if we have enough articles related to that place to justify one, it's evident that we don't have that here — I even scanned Dorchester's "What links here", and didn't find any additional topics that could be appropriately added besides the two that are already present.
Bearcat (
talk)
23:03, 24 February 2012 (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.