Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 August 18

< August 17	August 19 >

August 18

Category:Czech companies

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 --Kbdank71 20:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Empty, also duplicate of Category:Companies of the Czech Republic. Jklamo 23:23, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. David Kernow 00:03, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/merge Hawkestone 17:32, 19 August 2006 (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.

Category:New South Wales villages

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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/merge as nominated --Kbdank71 13:40, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:New South Wales villages to Category:Villages in New South Wales

Rename per naming convention. Casper Claiborne 23:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Villages of New South Wales...? David Kernow 00:04, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Cloachland 02:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Categories of settlements use "in". Hawkestone 17:33, 19 August 2006 (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.

Category:Agricultural and natural resource economics; environmental and ecological economics

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 found deleted --Kbdank71 13:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I created this overlong category as part of the JEL classification codes. I've depopulated it, and moved the subcategories to Category:Economics, so now it serves no purpose JQ 22:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mark as {{db-author}}...? David Kernow 00:04, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment done JQ 11:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Hawkestone 17:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to overlong name and since iot is depopulated. Alan Liefting 01:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Nathan Mercer 10:45, 25 August 2006 (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.

Category:Fictional magnetokineticists

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 keep --Kbdank71 13:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, This is a category which does and can only encorporate four characters. Unless there are other "magnetokineticists" in fiction, but honest to God I can't think of any. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:57, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Magenta (comics), Siena Blaze, Magnemite, Magneton, Windcharger... Keep.--Mike Selinker 05:29, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per MS - Jc37 17:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, in order to provide a full cycle of superpower categories. --M @r ē ino 14:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per MS and Mareino. CameoAppearance 00:19, 23 August 2006 (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.

Category:The Weavers

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 --Kbdank71 13:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, List of people who happen to share the same name, but "who might be related". -- Gogo Dodo 22:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; more coincidental than encyclopedic. David Kernow 00:06, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and David Kernow Cloachland 02:06, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Cswrye 14:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator. --Nlu (talk) 03:45, 24 August 2006 (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.

Category:Fictional cyberpaths

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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/merge as nominated --Kbdank71 13:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Duplicate category of Category:Fictional technopaths. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hold Off until the articles are merged. Eluchil404 19:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The articles could be merged whenever. I don't think anyone's voiced an opposition on the merge. I think cyberpathy is encompassed under the term technopathy.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 16:51, 25 August 2006 (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.

Category:Fictional umbrakineticists

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 keep --Kbdank71 13:33, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Every character in this category already belongs in the wider category: Category:Fictional photokineticists. Just seems like an extra trivia to differentiate cahracters who have already been categorised by the same ability. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Naw, this is different. Cloak and Dagger have different powers, not variations of the same power. Keep.--Mike Selinker 05:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- But it's still "control of light", otherwise it would be a category referring that Marvel concept of darkforce. The definition given in its own category: "The psychokinetic ability to manipulate or neutralize light, resulting in utter darkness. A variant of photokinesis." ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 10:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I certainly think the darkforce users are doing something other than controlling light, and it's reasonable to extend that concept to any other darkness manipulators. The category description should change to something like "These people control darkness." It manifests very differently in the comics that what people like Dazzler do.--Mike Selinker 13:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - this seems to just be an arguement over whether darkness is a "lack of light", or a "material substance" (whether presently existing, spontaneously generated, or brought from elsewhere). - Jc37 17:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, that's fine then, I changed the category description so it includes darkforce and whatnot. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 13:34, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; I don't pretend to understand superhero physics, but it's a "real" and useful category inside that world. --M @r ē ino 14:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; I'm not completely sure about the world of superhero comics' opinion, but I'm of the opinion that these are separate, albeit closely related, abilities. If nothing else, it at least manifests differently from photokinesis (as MS said). CameoAppearance 00:23, 23 August 2006 (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.

Category:International Hockey Hall of Fame employees

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 --Kbdank71 13:31, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, This category only contains two people. They appear to be on the board and not actually employees of the IHHOF. I don't believe that this category is useful. JamesTeterenko 21:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. BoojiBoy 21:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete stupid catcruft per nom. RGTraynor 21:28, 18 August 2006 (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.

Category:United States Navy destroyer escorts

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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/merge as nominated --Kbdank71 20:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:United States Navy destroyer escorts into Category:Frigates and destroyer escorts of the United States Navy

Merge, this category is redundant. Until 1975, what the rest of the world called "frigates" the USN called "destroyer escorts". With the United States Navy 1975 ship reclassification, the USN renamed all of its DEs frigates. Note that these are not sailing frigates; they have their own category which will not be merged or touched in any way. TomTheHand 15:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and catredirect. Vegaswikian 17:18, 19 August 2006 (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.

Category:Planets of the DC Universe

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 --Kbdank71 20:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Ambiguous. Indeed, its creator is asking for its deletion [1]. -- Szvest 13:12, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Szvest. Mike Christie (talk) 15:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per request of creator of category. --Cswrye 14:43, 20 August 2006 (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.

Category:Kentucky University faculty

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 found deleted --Kbdank71 20:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, proposed deletion of category misnamed by author, Correct category created. Ohconfucius 10:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (on the assumption that Category:University of Kentucky faculty covers the same ground). Hawkestone 10:50, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete:U1 by request of creator. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 13:18, 18 August 2006 (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.

Category:Computer and video games with multiple possible endings

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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/merge to Category:Computer and video games with multiple endings --Kbdank71 20:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Computer and video games with multiple possible endings to Category:Multiple-ending computer and video games

Rename, simpler, cleaner title. Any available ending is a possibility after all. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 06:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename, snappier, removes redundant 'possible' Marasmusine 07:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The proposed name is awkward. Honbicot 07:59, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment "Multiple-ending" does sound a bit strange as an adjective. Since the word "possible" is unnecessary, how about Computer and video games with multiple endings? --SevereTireDamage 08:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Computer and video games with multiple endings seems fine to me. Regards, David Kernow 08:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename Category:Computer and video games with multiple endings Hawkestone 10:50, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Computer and video games with multiple endings. The word "possible" in the original title isn't needed. Keep the start of it as "Computer and video games" to be as consistent as possible with other categories in that genre. Dugwiki 21:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Computer and video games with multiple endings - clearer, and doesn't have multiple-ending, which is really awkward. --PresN 21:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Computer and video games with multiple endings - Jc37 17:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Computer and video games with multiple endings; just needed to get rid of that 'possible', since it doesn't add much to the category meaning, and is sort of awkward-sounding. I Jethrobot 07:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Computer and video games with multiple endings = This name is less awkward. --Cswrye 14:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Computer and video games with multiple endings. Sounds a bit better than the proposed name. RobJ1981 02:14, 21 August 2006 (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.

Category:Period piece computer and video games

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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/merge to Category:Computer and video games with historical settings --Kbdank71 20:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Period piece computer and video games to Category:Historical fiction computer and video games

Rename, Historical fiction is a much better title for the category. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 06:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename Clumsy title. no objections to Historical fiction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dman727 (talk • contribs)
Rename to Category:Computer and video games with historical settings per Jc37 below (thanks for suggestion!). "Historical fiction" suggests they are limited to histories created in novels etc, which I imagine may be true for some but not all... Regards, David Kernow 08:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC), updated 01:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Computer and video games with historical settings. - Jc37 17:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Computer and video games with historical settings - This name is less awkward. --Cswrye 14:43, 20 August 2006 (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.

Peoply by city

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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/merge as nominated --Kbdank71 20:40, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I came across two more that should be renamed per previous discussions.

--musicpvm 05:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 13:22, 18 August 2006 (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.

Category:American bassists

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 no consensus --Kbdank71 20:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Distribute members between Category:American bass guitarists and Category:American double-bassists as appropriate. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 02:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion. The reason is that there are probably articles that say a musician is a bassist or plays bass, but doesn't specify the exact instrument. For example, a musical stub article might just mention the person plays bass but not which of the two subcategories to use. Therefore the parent category in question Category:American bassists would be the most appropriate place for those ambiguous articles. Dugwiki 21:21, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, there are cases where an American musicians are only identified as a bassist. In this case we really don't know what instrument they play, and I think we should do one of two things. Either we should change the Category:American bassists tag to Category:American musicians, or simply remove it entirely. My point of view is that missing information is better than wrong or ambiguous information. -- ProveIt ^(talk)
- As I commented in the 8/17 discussions, though, you can still accurately say they play one of a small set of instruments. So it's not wrong or ambiguous to call them "bassists", as opposed to throwing them in with all the other possible musician types. (Of course, if an article never mentions "bass" at all, then it would be wrong to include them in a "bassist" category.) Dugwiki 17:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Dugwiki. --Usgnus 13:56, 22 August 2006 (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.

Category:People from Birmingham

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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/merge as nominated --Kbdank71 20:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Birmingham to Category:People from Birmingham, England

Rename to align with the other subcategories of Category:Birmingham, England and to avoid confusion with Category:People from Birmingham, Alabama. - EurekaLott 02:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per EurekaLott and Birmingham (disambiguation) ProveIt ^(talk) 02:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. David Kernow 08:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Hawkestone 10:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Dugwiki 21:23, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose should match the article which is at Birmingham. Tim! 09:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- If the category is renamed, I guess the article should be too. Regards, David Kernow 10:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I look forward to Paris, France and London, England with dread. Tim! 10:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - If this rename is approved, then feel free to nominate the article. Syracuse and the attempt to move the dab pointed out the problem with city names not following the same standard. Vegaswikian 17:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. --Cswrye 14:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom, and rename the Birmingham article to Birmingham, United Kingdom. For Americans and Canadians, the British Birmingham is definitely not the most well-known one. --M @r ē ino 14:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. However, the Birmingham article might be better renamed to Birmingham, West Midlands. — Dale Arnett 09:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Tim. Bluap 17:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Vegaswikian 05:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Nathan Mercer 10:46, 25 August 2006 (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.

Category:Guatemalan Spaniards

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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, empty --Kbdank71 20:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Spanish-Guatemalans already exists. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gtrojan (talk • contribs) .

Oppose they are not duplicates. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 01:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I agree with Prove It, but someone has emptied the category before the vote was finished. Whoever did that, please revert yourself so that we can follow proper process! --M @r ē ino 14:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As empty. I suspect the person who created it really wanted Category:Spanish-Guatemalans. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 15:10, 23 August 2006 (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.

Category: Star Wars Galaxies

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding 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 --Kbdank71 20:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Star Wars Galaxies

Delete. It's a popular game, but from the looks of it, there is certainly nothing major to put in this category other than the game itself. RobJ1981 00:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I've worked on the SWG article, and the only other article I can think of that could qualify for inclusion in this category is Star Wars Galaxies: The Ruins of Dantooine. —Mi ra 10:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Cswrye 14:43, 20 August 2006 (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.