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.
Object -- The problem is that we do not have a main article on the College:
[1]. It is a tertiary college, of a kind for which we normally have an article. The present article is a redirect to
Baptists Together, an article on the denomination, which in fact says nothing about the college. It looks as if it a rather small college as it appears only to have five staff, but this is not uncommon for denominational colleges (in US, theological seminaries).
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:42, 15 January 2020 (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:Air Force templates
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:Issues
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.
Keep. there are abundant ways that this category can serve a highly-useful purpose, for the purposes of the encyclopedia project. if the category criteria need to be defined more narrowly, then that can be addressed further at the category's page. --
Sm8900 (
talk)
19:33, 13 January 2020 (UTC)reply
to collect articles of various types which pertain specifically to the topic of "issues." this includes articles which focus upon and describe various types of issues, i.e such as
valence issue or
wedge issue; such articles already appear in this category.
as well, it would compile various cats and subcats which pertain to "issues" as a topic in their own right, not only topics which are divided by issue. every profession and every field has issues which it faces as an ongoing field of inquiry. so it is not intended to be a place to collect every individual topic which constitutes a political issue, or even only categories at Wikipedia divided up by issue; rather, it is to compile various topics which are inherently delineated by issue, as a specific type of inquiry within various professions, fields or academic disciplines. --
Sm8900 (
talk)
22:05, 13 January 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Marcocapelle: I have revised my comment above somewhat; in fairness to your insights, I will restate my views here to fully respond to your valid question. this cat is not for issues by type; it is for the topic of "Issues" themselves. we have articles like
wedge issue and
valence issue that are fully valid for inclusion in this category. thanks. --
Sm8900 (
talk)
19:16, 14 January 2020 (UTC)reply
I must say that I'm actually confused by what the "Issues" category actually refers to exactly. I came across it in the sociology WikiProject, but it does not seem to be sociological. There is also "Category:Social issues" (how do I link to this page here?).
Roostnerve (
talk)
16:44, 14 January 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Paradoctor:, thanks for your helpful question. No I want this category for all meanings of "Issues" that are valid for this purpose. My comments above were meant to convey that. thanks. --
Sm8900 (
talk)
19:13, 14 January 2020 (UTC)reply
"all meanings of "Issues" that are valid for this purpose" Can you spot the problem? The instant you exclude a meaning of "
issue", you have to disambiguate. "valid for this purpose" constitutes exactly this kind of exclusion. Or would you include articles pertaining to
Issues,
Issues,
Issues, and
Issues? What about
Prince Harry, issue of
Princess Diana?
Paradoctor (
talk)
19:57, 14 January 2020 (UTC)reply
the alternate and varying use of a word should not actually prohibit from using that word for a category. what about
Category:Effects? you could make absolutely the same point about that word as well. --
Sm8900 (
talk)
21:48, 14 January 2020 (UTC)reply
would you accept the category more if it was renamed, to include a qualifier in order to make the distinction? the question though is what qualifier would be effective. I'd have to think about that. --
Sm8900 (
talk)
21:53, 14 January 2020 (UTC)reply
errrrmmmm.... well
Debresser, okay, I do totally respect your concerns on this, and your point. However, sorry, but that doesn't seem entirely fair to me. so now, comments that people made here on one category, will be treated as if they apply to both? sorry, but that doesn't seem fair, imho. please note, I make all my category edits using hotcat, so everything I do in this area is immediately apparent and transparent to all users. I will wait to allow others to comment, but sorry, my opinion is that any such effort needs its own deletion proposal at CfD. --
Sm8900 (
talk)
22:11, 15 January 2020 (UTC)reply
I created that new category entirely as a positive step. I meant for it to be a useful, constructive and positive proposal to add to this discussion here. since someone here has objected to that category, I have now deleted it. we can discuss the proposal for this proposed category here if anyone wishes, but the category itself will be left for another time. thanks. --
Sm8900 (
talk)
22:20, 15 January 2020 (UTC)reply
An "Unidentified sound" is not an unsolved problem, and should not have been categorized that way. it would be an unexplained phenomenon, which is quite different. Actual unsolved problems would be items like those listed in this article:
List of unsolved problems in statistics. thanks. --
Sm8900 (
talk)
22:01, 13 January 2020 (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:Laurentian Bank of Canada people
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.
Delete. For future reference, nominator should be aware that it's not considered proper process to empty the category out first and then propose it for deletion — rather, you should list the category for deletion first and let the upmerging result from the conclusion of the deletion discussion. But with just two articles involved, it's not worth reverting everything just to have it unreverted again in a matter of days — the
snowball clause applies. That said, the target category still has just four articles even after the upmerge; one of those four articles is a person who probably shouldn't be categorized there at all, on grounds roughly analogous to
WP:PERFCAT, because he's a former employee of the bank who's notable for other reasons and not for his role with the bank per se; and another of the four articles is a person who hasn't been properly referenced as clearing our notability standards at all, because the only
reliable source present in the entire article is a listicle. So the target category should probably be deleted too, but that would have to be handled in a separate discussion.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:27, 16 January 2020 (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:HIV/AIDS research institutes
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:Tevilat Kelim
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:WP:SMALLCAT, that is to say, I don't see how this category can ever become any larger (except perhaps by adding
Mikveh, which is not an article that would be specific to this category).
Debresser (
talk)
14:02, 13 January 2020 (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:Cycling clubs by country
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:Anesthesia organizations
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:Alianza Lima templates
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:Operas by Rugilė Barzdžiukaitė
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.
Keep - it's part of
Category:Operas by composer so
WP:SMALLCAT justifies its retention (perhaps the 'unless' clause should be placed at the beginning). To judge from
this Rugilė_Barzdžiukaitė has been involved in 2 operas. The rationale is that the composer is a defining characteristic of an opera.
Oculi (
talk)
18:14, 5 January 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Oculi, where are you reading that Barzdžiukaitė was the composer? She's a director by trade. Sources do not distinguish a composer such that I've found thus far, but Lapelytė is the one who's a composer by trade. Also I had seen the ltwiki article, which doesn't have independent articles for the two operas. Would
Category:Operas by women composers not be sufficient? czar18:41, 5 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment If she is not the composer, then the article should be removed, and the category deleted as empty, without involvement of WP:CFD.
Debresser (
talk)
18:22, 14 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Your edit summary explained that you removed the article because you wanted to get rid of the category. That is out of order depopulation of a category, and the
WP:CFD guideline says not to do this. So the revert was correct. If you would redo the remove, this time claiming that it is incorrect since she was not the composer, then the edit would not be reverted (unless it would be shown that she is the composer).
Debresser (
talk)
16:25, 18 January 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Debresser, sorry, where does
WP:CFD say not to revert the bold creation of a category that has a single member? I'd also be interested in the precedent for creating "Operas by X" for composers with a single credit to their name. czar17:36, 18 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Well, as a rule, one shouldn't empty categories when nominating them for deletion. I understand your point, as the category was deletion the day before it was nominated for deletion, but still.
Debresser (
talk)
21:52, 18 January 2020 (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:New Century Foundation
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.
Delete -- Five articles is the usual minimum. Here we have the foundation; its magazine; its publisher; etc. However I doubt we will get or need much more.
Peterkingiron (
talk)
17:49, 15 January 2020 (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.