Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< November 7 November 9 >

November 8

Category:Traditions by university or college

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 November 17#Category:Traditions by university or college

Category:Autobot subgroups

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: delete (merge and delete are equivalent). MER-C 10:40, 16 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Minor, unnecessary category TTN ( talk) 17:48, 8 November 2019 (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:Lists of Fellows of the Royal Society

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. MER-C 11:38, 17 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Case fix per various recent discussions and article renamings. Dicklyon ( talk) 15:30, 8 November 2019 (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:Waist aprons

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: speedily deleted WP:G7. – Fayenatic London 08:47, 9 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Created by mistake. Sorry. Themightyquill ( talk) 13:58, 8 November 2019 (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:Franz Kafka characters

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: delete. MER-C 10:41, 16 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Redirect-only category. I have no idea if it could potentially be populated, but it currently has no reason to exist. TTN ( talk) 12:06, 8 November 2019 (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:Washington International University alumni

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: delete. MER-C 10:42, 16 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Washington International University is a diploma mill. There can be legitimate questions wether such diploma mills can have alumni, and wether holding a degree from one can be a defining characteristic. Here's a link to the deletion discussion about a previous such category. Place Clichy ( talk) 11:13, 15 October 2019 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon ( talk) 05:31, 27 October 2019 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:55, 8 November 2019 (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:Psychology terminology

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: delete. MER-C 10:42, 16 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: delete, the articles are not about terminology. The titles of these articles may be terms, but articles should be categorized by the article's topic. There is no need to merge, the articles are already in other appropriate psychology categories. Marcocapelle ( talk) 20:01, 27 October 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose unless and until a more systemic solution can be found. All of our terminology categories are like this (see, e.g., the parent Category:Medical terminology). The problem is that the word terminology has been broadened in everyday use to mean more than the study or systematics of terms within a field, to just refer to the terms themselves. We either need to use a different word or just accept that these categories will include both articles on terms and articles on systems/sets of terms.  —  SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:05, 27 October 2019 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:55, 8 November 2019 (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:Medical virtual communities

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: split. MER-C 10:45, 16 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: much the same thing, but slightly wider scope. Arguably motherhood and pregnancy are not medical conditions, but they generate similar needs for support. No definition article for either, and support groups is better populated. Rathfelder ( talk) 20:03, 28 October[[:Category:Medical associations 2019 (UTC)
  • Question, three articles are about professionals' (physicians') networks. While they do not belong in a support group category, where should we leave them? 06:41, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:55, 8 November 2019 (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:Collaboration with the British Empire

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: delete manually (i.e. selective merge). MER-C 11:31, 17 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: I am nominating this category and all subcats for deletion. They are POV cats created by Claíomh Solais, who was blocked for disruptive editing of anti-Western nature. The people in these categories are already in other relevant categories (e.g. subcats of Category:Spies) or don't belong at all. For an example of the latter, Alexander Halpern, currently in Category:Russian collaborators with the British Empire, fled from the Soviet Union and later worked for MI6 during World War II. He was not a collaborator, just a refugee. Fiamh ( talk, contribs) 12:34, 29 October 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: Category:Irish collaborators with the British Empire was already listed for deletion. Fiamh ( talk, contribs) 12:36, 29 October 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - this clearly seems disruptive editing. Looking at the French category, it is filled with people linked to several British WWII outfits such as the SOE. Knowing that France was actually allied with the UK in WWII, and that it was occupied by Germany and not Britain, the LABELs of collaborators and British Empire are both laughable and anachronic. I would have expected to see the people who made the Quiberon landing possible, but this does not seem to be the orientation, or knowledge, of the creator. Place Clichy ( talk) 23:07, 29 October 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Restructure -- Collaboration is a pejorative term whose use implies a lack of NPOV. I am glad that the creator has been blocked. Nevertheless, some of what he/she produced does provide genuine categories, which need to be renamed. Rather than "British Empire" which was always a nebulous entity, I would put United Kingdom.
  • American: this is about loyalists during the American War of Independence, who sided with "Great Britain" In this case, not British Empire. Suggest Category:Loyalists during American War of Independence ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
  • Danish, French, 1 German (a Jewish refugee) and 1 Spaniard were in some form participating in the Allied struggle against the Axis powers in WWII: the French should perhaps be categorised as "Free French". The other Spaniard does not appear to fit here at all.
  • Russian: one was a refugee a "White Russian", who spied for UK in WWII. The other was a defector (outside the theme of the others).
  • Italian and Indian (one person) was an ant-fascist refugee who fought for UK in WWII.
Suggest Rename to Fooian people in British service in WWII, but purge 1 Spaniard and the Russian defector (possibly a few more). However perhaps someone knows of a suitable category into which such people might be merged. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:04, 4 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:55, 8 November 2019 (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:Songs written by Steven Dale Jones

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: no consensus. MER-C 11:00, 16 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Delete Until this songwriter's notability is confirmed by the existence of a Wikipedia article, we should not have a category for these songs. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 14:18, 30 October 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose. This category is the collection of songs by a common defining item, the songwriter. Whether the songwriter is individually notable does not concern the categorisation of the songs. There is no guideline which suggests that an article should exist for the category to exist, only that if both exist the category should follow the naming of the article. NB Many similar cats have been nominated and none have been deleted. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 15:24, 30 October 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Not because Steven Dale Jones isn't notable per se, but because this category is non-defining. For any of the songs in this category, do RS commonly and consistently refer to it as a song written by Steven Dale Jones? Not as far as I can tell. Yes, a song's writer can be a defining characteristic, but usually because the writer is particularly notable. Being written by Oscar Hammerstein is a defining characteristic of My Favorite Things (song). Being written by Max Martin is a characteristic of ...Baby One More Time (song). Being written by Meghan Trainor is a defining characteristic of Ain't Your Mama. Because these writers are all commonly discussed in RS when talking about the respective song. Not the case here. Colin M ( talk) 16:49, 30 October 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - all but one of the songs mention SDJ in the first sentence. The writer of a song is self-evidently defining. Oculi ( talk) 23:25, 30 October 2019 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:55, 8 November 2019 (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:Questionable

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: delete. MER-C 10:43, 16 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Category is no longer used by the Questionable Cabal and also has pointed out to be in violation of WP:NOTFORUM . Upsidedown Keyboard ...? ( talk) 13:23, 31 October 2019 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 11:03, 8 November 2019 (UTC) reply
And the category is now empty after the template that was in it got speedy-deleted G7 after the author (same as nom for this CfD) declared it abandoned. Ikluft ( talk) 01:02, 10 November 2019 (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:Trololo

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: Speedy deleted. as vandalism. ( non-admin closure) – MJL  ‐Talk‐ ☖ 16:57, 8 November 2019 (UTC) reply
Nominator's rationale: Pointlessness DBaK ( talk) 10:43, 8 November 2019 (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.

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 November 16#Category:Health care-related timelines

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_November_8&oldid=1055521792"

Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE