Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 August 17
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
August 17
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 01:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
See previous Cfd's cat:Free Linux sw and cat:Free Mac OS sw. Although this one says "Mac OS-only", I just got through removing "free windows" cats from some of the articles. I think eventually the sw will be avail on other platforms, and like the 2 previous Cfd's, it should be merged with Category:Free software and deleted. ∞Who?¿? 22:27, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I do not oppose Reinyday's suggestions. ∞Who?¿? 04:49, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It should be merged with Category:Freeware, and then open source software should be placed in Category:Free software (if I understand the distinction correctly). -- Reinyday, 22:52, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
- I agree with Reinyday. We should be cautious when recategorizing, though. Some articles probably belong in both categories. Nandesuka 23:43, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, since similar categories are all deleted/merged. --minghong 00:06, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per previous CfDs. Pavel Vozenilek 00:55, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Empty and unnecessary. siafu 05:32, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per precedent (and observe we should collect our CfD precdents up somewhere....like Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Conclusions). -Splash 01:02, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: the category is empty because it was emptied. — boredzo (✍) 05:17, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Speedy deleted. ∞Who?¿? 01:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Empty; duplicates Category:Pakistani newspapers. I ask again why does WP lack a provision for speedy deletion of categories. - choster 22:03, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy. My weak memory says speedy is allowed in such situations but perhaps I misread something. Pavel Vozenilek 22:20, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- speedy delete What do you mean no provision for speedying categories? See Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Categories, empty categories can be speedied. Just slap a {{delete}} or {{db|<reason>}} on the "no brainers" and they will usualy be gone by the end of the day. --Sherool 22:48, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. There is no mention on Wikipedia:Categories for deletion, only renaming. I will add it. - choster 13:51, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- We already have Wikipedia:Categories for deletion policies. -Splash 16:16, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- speedy delete. I've added the {{db}} tag. Nandesuka 23:05, 17 August 2005 (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 category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
Transformers categories
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 01:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Transformers Autobots, Category:Transformers Decepticons, Category:Transformers Maximals, Category:Transformers Predacons, Category:Transformers Vehicons, Category:Transformers Cybertrons, Category:Transformers Destrons, Category:Transformers Mini-Cons
- Delete. Redundant, now that there are categories without "Transformers" in the title for all of them. --Apostrophe 20:34, 17 August 2005 (UTC) converted to cfdu ∞Who?¿? 05:25, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per Who. -- BD2412 talk 16:14, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
Some bird categories
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Rename. ∞Who?¿? 01:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
For consistency with the rest of orders under category:Birds by classification (work in progress). For a similar case, see category:Gaviiformes, not category:Loons. Circeus 19:10, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
- In the same line of though, Hummingbirds →Trochiliformes
Especially since over half the species that can be classified there are not actually called "hummingbird" (I'll probably later recreate the cat for a related category:Birds by name tree, but that's not coming anytime soon). Circeus 21:43, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
Superceded and emptied through implementation of category:Birds by classification. I'd maintain it if the birds were not actually called "quails", and not "new world quails" (confusing with eventual category:quails, which will iclude birds belonging to phasianidae)
- Rename per nom. ∞Who?¿? 05:43, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename. No argument. siafu 06:04, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Slightly overenthousiastic user JohnCastle already moved all articles in category:Grebes and category:Hummingbirds.
- Rename, good point. feydey 13:21, 21 August 2005 (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 category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
Native American languages
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Rename all. ∞Who?¿? 01:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
"Native American" is an ambiguous term. It can be used and interpreted as referring to either indigenous peoples of the Americas, or indigenous peoples in the United States of America. In Canada the term is very rarely if ever used to refer to all indigenous peoples of the Americas [1] [2], but the scope of the following categories do encompass Canada. Article renamings that have already been performed without expressed objections include: Native American languages to Indigenous languages of the Americas, Classification schemes for Native American languages to Classification schemes for indigenous languages of the Americas, and Classification of Native Americans to Classification of indigenous peoples of the Americas. The following proposals add precision and remove ambiguity from current category names.
Note: Category:Indigenous languages of the Americas is currently an empty category whose purpose is served by Category:Indigenous languages of the Americas stubs. Kurieeto 17:55, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
- Category:Native American languages → Category:Indigenous languages of the Americas
- Category:Native American languages of California → Category:Indigenous languages of California
- Category:Native American languages of the Arctic → Category:Indigenous languages of the North American Arctic
- Category:Native American languages of the Great Basin → Category:Indigenous languages of the North American Great Basin
- Category:Native American languages of the Northwest Coast → Category:Indigenous languages of the North American Northwest Coast
- Category:Native American languages of the Plains → Category:Indigenous languages of the North American Plains
- Category:Native American languages of the Plateau → Category:Indigenous languages of the North American Plateau
- Category:Native American languages of the Southeast → Category:Indigenous languages of the North American Southeast
- Category:Native American languages of the Southwest → Category:Indigenous languages of the North American Southwest
- Category:Native American languages of the Subarctic → Category:Indigenous languages of the North American Subarctic
- Category:Native American languages of the eastern woodlands → Category:Indigenous languages of the North American eastern woodlands
- Category:Indigenous languages of the Americas is empty through my copy-paste mistake. I apparently forgot about it. Anyway, I moved these subcategories under it.
- A note about Category:Indigenous languages of the Americas stubs: this category is missing the 170 articles that still remain in Category:Native American language stubs. Apparently, the articles which use the template I made, Template:na-lang-stub, dont get updated even though I updated the template. Why?
- You need to go to each article that uses the template and make a 'null-edit'. Just click the edit button, and then click save without doing anything — this causes the article to be updated from the template. Tedious, so you might as well add it to this CfD and we'll have a bot do it. -Splash 01:02, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This rename makes sense to me as well. The organization of which I am member, The Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas, is named similarily.
- Assuming that this rename is ok with everyone, I will make categories for S. Amer in the above proposed fashion, e.g. Category:Indigenous languages of the South American Amazonia. – ishwar (speak) 19:41, 2005 August 17 (UTC)
- Rename. As per proposal, formulations using the term "indigenous peoples..." are less problematic than those which use "native american..."; it is consistent with parallel category schemes on indigenous peoples themselves; "indigenous peoples" has wide global currency, it is probably the most "neutral" way of expressing the concept, and the one more readily and commonly understood by readers from parts of the globe outside of the US.--cjllw | TALK 23:20, 2005 August 17 (UTC)
- Rename per proposal. -Splash 01:02, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename. Makes sense to remove ambiguity, and to use term used by professional associations.Luigizanasi 17:53, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename per nom. ∞Who?¿? 18:02, 21 August 2005 (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 category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 01:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- delete. Ditto. --Ghirlandajo 06:48, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- delete. I wonder how people even come up with such weird categories. KNewman 11:04, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
- delete. And disallow the Category:Natives of South-Eastern Asia. mikka (t) 15:21, 17 August 2005 (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 category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 01:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- delete. The category would include all natives of Saint Petersburg and half Russian people, notwithstanding their occupation. I don't think that the criterion is informative, considering that the district was created several years ago and will probably abolished after the end of Putin's tenure. --Ghirlandajo 06:48, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- delete. See comment above. KNewman 11:05, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
- delete. Pointless category. mikka (t) 15:22, 17 August 2005 (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 category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Speedy deleted. ∞Who?¿? 01:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- delete. Nonsense. Dismas 00:45, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- delete. Nonsense --AYArktos 00:49, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- delete nonsense. Ken talk|contribs 01:09, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
- All additions to the cat were vandalism from unblockable AOL anons. I've emptied the cat and it needs speedy deleting. -Splash 01:17, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete this cheesy nonsense. Jonathunder 04:48, 2005 August 22 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Sent to WP:SFD. ∞Who?¿? 01:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete — empty category that is redundant with Category:General Education stubs. (Hope I did this right...) — RJH 00:36, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Defer to Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. siafu 05:36, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Take to SFD, as it says at the top of the page. BTW - Category:General Education stubs is incorrectly named, and should be simply Category:Education stubs. Grutness...wha? 06:10, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, I've taken the new category and template there, so don't bother. Badly capitalised, badly named, not created through the stub sorting project (and in fact working directly against current proposals). Created by the looks of it simply to create more work for the stub sorters. Annoying in the extreme. Grutness...wha? 06:24, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- So can this CfD debate delete the cat in the nomination? -Splash 01:02, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- No, it's a stub category, so it goes to WP:SFD. Similarly, the stub template goes to sfd not tfd. See the "Special notes" section at the top of this page. Grutness...wha? 01:21, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, I've taken the new category and template there, so don't bother. Badly capitalised, badly named, not created through the stub sorting project (and in fact working directly against current proposals). Created by the looks of it simply to create more work for the stub sorters. Annoying in the extreme. Grutness...wha? 06:24, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Deferred Changed tag to {{Sfd-c}}, discussion deferred until decision made on Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion, please do not vote here. Grutness, I assume the current listing for Category:General Education stubs will cover this cat and template? ∞Who?¿? 17:26, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Probably - this one's a confusing one that I've taken to the Stub sorting wikiproject for further consideration. The two categories have both been around for some time but served different purposes. Someone has made a LOT of work for the stub sorters by emptying one of the two categories into the other (the "Education" one was misnamed as it actually contained stubs related to tertiary education - the General Education one is just miscapitalised, as well as being a cumbersome term). I have suggested ccreating a new Tertiary education one or something similar, then moving everything else into the Education one and deleting the General Education one. Unfortunately the task has been made twice as hard by whoever decided to empty the Education one in the first place :( Grutness...wha? 06:41, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Yea, it would be nice if there were a way to see the category article history. You could always check the last editors contribs and dig through their histories for the missing articles. ∞Who?¿? 07:31, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Probably - this one's a confusing one that I've taken to the Stub sorting wikiproject for further consideration. The two categories have both been around for some time but served different purposes. Someone has made a LOT of work for the stub sorters by emptying one of the two categories into the other (the "Education" one was misnamed as it actually contained stubs related to tertiary education - the General Education one is just miscapitalised, as well as being a cumbersome term). I have suggested ccreating a new Tertiary education one or something similar, then moving everything else into the Education one and deleting the General Education one. Unfortunately the task has been made twice as hard by whoever decided to empty the Education one in the first place :( Grutness...wha? 06:41, 22 August 2005 (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 category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.