Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 April 15

< April 14 April 16 >

April 15

Category:Iranian-American actors

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: merge to Category:American people of Iranian descent and Category:American actors of Asian descent. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Iranian-American actors to Category:American people of Asian descentCategory:American people of Iranian descent and Category:American actors of Asian descent (now listed as a speedy rename)
Nominator's rationale: Category:American people of Iranian descent is not so heavily populated to sub-divide it by occupation. It would also be possible to merge these contents to a Category:Actors of Iranian descent, but there is not yet a substantial tree Category:Actors by ethnic or national descent - views? Mayumashu (talk) 00:03, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're right - sorry and thank you! Mayumashu (talk) 17:56, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a problem with including Danny Huston - article says he is of part 'Anglo-Iranian' descent and 'Fooian descent' means either descendant of the country or the ethnicity 'Fooia'. Mayumashu (talk) 17:59, 16 April 2010 (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.

Parishes of Ireland

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 per nom and cleanup. The question is what it intended by the category and this is clearly pointed out in the introduction that it is for civil parishes. If religious parishes where to be included, that line would not be there. After the rename, the nominator and others will probably need to be doing some cleanup. I'll try and fix some of the parenting, but I may not have time to do it all. Delete Category:Parishes of the Republic of Ireland by county. Note that where religious parishes exist, the existing categories may be recreated with a less ambiguous name. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:39, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming
Category:Parishes of Ireland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
to Category:Civil parishes of Ireland
  1. Category:Parishes of Northern Ireland to Category:Civil parishes of Northern Ireland
    1. Category:Parishes of County Antrim to Category:Civil parishes of County Antrim
    2. Category:Parishes of County Armagh to Category:Civil parishes of County Armagh
    3. Category:Parishes of County Down to Category:Civil parishes of County Down
    4. Category:Parishes of County Fermanagh to Category:Civil parishes of County Fermanagh
    5. Category:Parishes of County Londonderry to Category:Civil parishes of County Londonderry
    6. Category:Parishes of County Tyrone to Category:Civil parishes of County Tyrone
  2. Category:Parishes of the Republic of Ireland to Category:Civil parishes of the Republic of Ireland
    1. Category:Parishes of County Cavan to Category:Civil parishes of County Cavan
    2. Category:Parishes of County Clare to Category:Civil parishes of County Clare
    3. Category:Parishes of County Cork to Category:Civil parishes of County Cork
    4. Category:Parishes of County Donegal to Category:Civil parishes of County Donegal
    5. Category:Parishes of County Dublin to Category:Civil parishes of County Dublin
    6. Category:Parishes of County Galway to Category:Civil parishes of County Galway
    7. Category:Parishes of County Kerry to Category:Civil parishes of County Kerry
    8. Category:Parishes of County Limerick to Category:Civil parishes of County Limerick
    9. Category:Parishes of County Louth to Category:Civil parishes of County Louth
    10. Category:Parishes of County Mayo to Category:Civil parishes of County Mayo
    11. Category:Parishes of County Meath to Category:Civil parishes of County Meath
    12. Category:Parishes of County Monaghan to Category:Civil parishes of County Monaghan
    13. Category:Parishes of County Sligo to Category:Civil parishes of County Sligo
    14. Category:Parishes of County Tipperary to Category:Civil parishes of County Tipperary
    15. Category:Parishes of County Wexford to Category:Civil parishes of County Wexford
Nominator's rationale: rename: The parent article forlornly states it is for civil parishes, not religious ones. Church of Ireland parishes were once the same as civil parishes, but have diverged over 150 years; Roman Catholicism in Ireland has had different parishes since the Penal Laws. Civil parishes are obsolete for most purposes and most people have no idea which one they live in, whereas quite a few are members of a Catholic or Anglican parish. In summary, "parish" does not by default mean "civil parish" in Ireland, so WP:COMMONNAME applies. Some of the articles in subcategories do actually relate to current religious parishes rather than historical civil parishes (see e.g. in Category:Parishes of County Dublin); these articles should be removed from the relevant categories when renamed. jnestorius(talk) 19:56, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question. How many articles actually exist on civil parishes in either the 26-counties, and how many in the 6? I am leaning to oppose, because I think that this is using a sledgehammer to crack a nut: I don't recall ever encountering an article on a civil parish in the 26 counties., but since most of these categories are very sparsely populated, I think that the simplest solution for now is to keep all flavours of parish together. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • I only found the category after discussion at Talk:Civil parish#Ireland from User:Hohenloh, who has been populating Category:Civil parishes in Dublin. Keeping everything together strikes me as a bad idea. I agree the categories are little populated, but already the few articles that are there are so disparate that the category is uninformative. The civil parish category can be in an article about a village or locality which shares its name, and each county should ultimately have at a minimum a list-of-civil-parishes article as the 6-counties currently do. A good number of village articles could quickly be added to the categories once renamed. Do you envisage the current articles all having "(Church of Ireland parish)"-style disambiguators? I would question whether most catholic or anglican parishes are encyclopedic at all. A namechange would in addition disscourage a well-meaning parishioner from cluttering an article about a locality with information about Mass times. The religious details should be combined with the article about the parish church until the unlikely event that there is enough to refactor out. I think acting now while the problem affects few articles is better than waiting till the mess is larger. Doing nothing is the easiest solution for editors, but not the simplest for users. jnestorius(talk) 06:03, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename. The outline suggested is the way it will have to be at some time in the future. It is probably overkill at the moment, but clearing the mess up now is going to be less work than later on. p.s. Category:Parishes of County Meath does NOT need renaming - it is already correct. Twiceuponatime (talk) 09:43, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree about Meath. The solitary article Bohermeen should be merged with Ardbraccan. I don't think there is often a need for an article about a Catholic parish (Category:Church parishes is pretty barren) and the article is either about the civil parish or a more general region in Category:Geography of County Meath jnestorius(talk) 17:27, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename. (and I hope I understand this correctly!) I'm approaching this from a historical perspective. "Civil parishes", which in effect were Church of Ireland parishes, was the denomination used for hundreds of years for local administration. This included churches, schools, fire brigades, alms-houses, widows-houses, orphanages, dispensaries, even hospitals and public buildings. They changed from time to time, splitting and uniting (which I've mentioned in every article I've dealt with). It's important to get this clear. Each civil parish had defined boundaries. I created the category Civil parishes in Dublin in order to clarify that the article related to the civil parish - Roman Catholic parishes were a different matter. In creating and re-working the articles on Dublin Church of Ireland/Civil parishes, I've tried to ensure that each article includes the elements that constituted a parish at that time: church, church history, church-yard (ie, cemetery), parish, parish history, parishioners, parish school and charities, plus some local history. I've still got about half a dozen articles to go to finish off Dublin, and BTW I'd appreciate feedback on this. Thanks, Hohenloh + 10:41, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. After the further clarifications from Jnestorius and Hohenloh, I am leaning towards supporting the nomination, but I have some reservations: the civil parishes are a historical issue, but the current Roman Catholic parishes are more likely to be familiar to editors, simply because they are current, so I suggest that we need a little more discussion of how to categorise them.
    I also think we need badly more input. I see no sign of a notification to WikiProject Ireland, so I will add that notice now ... and I suggest that this nomination should be relisted to allow further discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:37, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • If articles on denominational parishes exist, could they be referenced in the "See also" section of the Civil parish article (if most of the parish lies within the civil parish)? Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:28, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thinking about this again, it sounds like an ideal opportunity to do a logical "grand slam". Much work has been done on the "Baronies of Ireland" category. The next geographical division is the Civil Parish, which this proposal would address. The final part is the townland. Now this is currently sandwiched uncomfortably between the Baronise and County categories. More confusingly, there are categories like "Category:Townlands of County Tipperary". I think that this latter category should be abolished. It should instead flow in a logical geographical and administrative hierachy from greatest to least, that is, county, barony, civil parish and townland. This would involve the merging or re-location of several current categories. Thoughts anyone? Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Let's do this one step at a time, please; the parenting of parishes and townlands can be examined separately from this decision on splitting the civil and religious parsishes. (However, note that baronies and the later rural districts are historical divisions, whereas townlands are still in use. It would make no sense to have to go through a defunct layer to navigate between two current layers). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:51, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't agree about the defunct status of baronies. But this argument has been well played out on the discussion page. Can we at least agree to do no damage that would prevent a later exercise along the lines i suggested above? That is, leave open the possibliity at a later date of having a serious re-organisation of the categoeies (using the hierarchy suggested above) while not impeding the current proposed change? Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:14, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What discussion page has been discussing baronies? And what proposals do you see here that would impede the re-organisation you suggest? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Baronies of Ireland discussion page. Plus individual baronies (e.g. Eliogarty ). Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:58, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I've changed my mind on the matter. Reason # 1 - The parishes of the Catholic Church in Ireland are generally unrelated to civil parishes. As the majority religion, most people would have no common basis of understanding. Even in the Church of Ireland, the wholesale amalgamation of parishes and indeed dioceses have caused that community memory of former times to wanne. Reason # 2 - their original use in local taxation was superceded by District Electoral Divisions by the mid-nineteenth century. Reason # 3 - there is no reliable on-line source that can trace, to the level of detail that would be necessary, the boundary of a civil parish. The knowledge has been lost, let's acknowledge it. And you know what, it was never that important anyway. They were not so much units of local administration as weapons in a larger battle of cultural warfare between the conqueror and the conquered. Let's get over it. Let the re-categorisations continue along county and denominational lines. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:12, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, postdlf (talk) 23:04, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename. şṗøʀĸɕäɾłäů∂ɛ:τᴀʟĸ 21:24, 19 April 2010 (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:Novotel Hotels Hong Kong

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. Category has also remained empty. Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Novotel Hotels Hong Kong (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Besides WP:SPAM considerations, doesn't look like a category with much potential for growth. Richhoncho (talk) 20:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have requested the hotel be speedy deleted as an advert. Szzuk (talk) 21:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was deleted. Nothing in the category now. Szzuk (talk) 21:23, 18 April 2010 (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:Teochew Malaysians

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; in light of the lack of objections once this was moved from speedy, I think it's safe to rename. The extra time and exposure has served its purpose. I understand the anon's objection in the speedy section as being merely an objection to the use of the speedy procedure and not as an objection to the proposal as such. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:15, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Teochew Malaysians to Category:Malaysian Chaoshanese people
Nominator's rationale: Procedural listing of a contested speedy renaming nomination.

Discussion moved from Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy:

  • Category:Teochew Malaysians to Category:Malaysian Chaoshanese people C2C (as a subcat of Category:Chaoshanese people) Mayumashu (talk) 14:52, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
    Object this needs a CFD, since there is no Chaoshanese article, but there is a Teochew dialect article. If this is categorization by linguistic group, it's name is correct. 65.94.253.16 (talk) 05:22, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
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 Otis Williams (Temptations)

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:22, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Songs written by Otis Williams (Temptations) to Category:Songs written by Otis Williams
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match article title Otis Williams. Creator notified and agrees. Richhoncho (talk) 19:24, 15 April 2010 (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:Maldivian national football teams

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: nomination withdrawn. -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Maldivian national football teams (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Category that cannot expand. If if it was Maldavian national sporting teams it would be different. At least that's my intepretation. Richhoncho (talk) 19:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Part of the Category:National association football teams system. There is room for expansion, albeit expansion that will probably be long in coming.- choster (talk) 21:27, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw nomination. Point taken, I can't see any reason why I shouldn't withdraw nomination. --Richhoncho (talk) 22:00, 16 April 2010 (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:People from Willemstad, Netherlands Antilles

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: keep. Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:People from Willemstad, Netherlands Antilles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. It is essentially the same as Category:People from Curaçao, as, according to Wikipedia, 125,000 of Curacao's 151,000 inhabitants live in Willemstad. It seems that most to all articles are already in Category:People from Curaçao, which is why I've nominated it for deletion instead of merging.- TM 22:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ξxplicit 18:56, 15 April 2010 (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:Life after death

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Life after death to Category:Afterlife
Nominator's rationale: Per main article--afterlife--and subcategories, e.g. Category:Afterlife places. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment but reincarnation is not the afterlife... 70.29.208.247 (talk) 04:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- for mostly aesthetic reasons, however I do think the term is prevalent in the lit.Greg Bard 19:26, 22 April 2010 (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:Turkish-speaking countries and territories

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:26, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Turkish-speaking countries and territories (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: The only "Turkish-speaking" country in this category is Turkey. The creator's intent was probably to create a category to list the countries/territories where Turkic languages are spoken, so another option is to rename this category.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); April 15, 2010; 14:51 (UTC)
Delete - it's impossible to determine which countries should go in this category because Turkish is probably spoken by at least a person or two in every country. I wouldn't support renaming the category either as the problem would still be the same. Laurent (talk) 17:14, 18 April 2010 (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:Music charts

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 (category has remained empty). Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:27, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Music charts (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: The category is empty. The only thing found in this category was Category:Record charts, which I moved up one category. Category:Music charts was an unnecessary "middleman" category between a parent category and Category:Record charts. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 13:39, 15 April 2010 (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:European Alpine regions

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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:European Alpine regions (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. At a mimimum, having European in the name seems redundant, but it just doesn't seem like a necessary addition to what's already in the various sub-cats of Category:Alps. For example, the only article currently in this cat, Rhône-Alpes, gets to cat:Alps via Category:Alpine countries, at the minimum. Also, I don't believe there's an article that clearly defines what is meant by "Regions that surround the Alpine Mountain" (at least beyond what's covered at Alps), which seems to make this cat overly vague. From the same editor that brought us this problematic cat. 76.121.3.85 (talk) 07:07, 15 April 2010 (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:International Soccer League (1960-1965)

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 (appears to be uncontroversial now that article name has changed). Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:19, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:International Soccer League (1960-1965) to Category:International Soccer League
Nominator's rationale: Per the main article, International Soccer League (recently moved from International Soccer League (1960-1965)). The year disambiguation is not needed as there is no article on another "International Soccer League" with which this league could be confused. If consensus is to retain parenthetical disambiguation, then rename to Category:International Soccer League (1960–1965). (Category creator notified using Template:Cfd-notify) -- Black Falcon (talk) 06:36, 15 April 2010 (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:Eurovision Song Contest entrants of 2001

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:  Relisted at 2010 MAY 5 CFD. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:26, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Eurovision Song Contest entrants of 2001 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. These performers are well covered in the article and the year in which they were an entrant is not notable for most if not all of these. If this passes, then a mass nomination for the remaining categories will need to made. Note well that some of the members here are listed in multiple related categories adding to category clutter on the article pages. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - delete makes the extra claim that being a Eurovision Song Contest entrant is not defining, which I would dispute as it is an annual hullabaloo which goes on for months. Upmerge to Category:Eurovision Song Contest entrants makes the claim that year is not defining, but produces an enormous category. [see below] It is not usual to appear more than say twice in Eurovision, so clutter is not unbounded ... Category:Eurovision Song Contest entrants by nationality would be another way to go, but not incompatible with 'by year'. (Elena Paparizou is in 2 of these.) My own view is that 'Eurovision Song Contest entrant' is defining and subcatting by year is a sensible scheme. Occuli (talk) 09:35, 15 April 2010 (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:RationalWikians

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:  Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 April 22. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:RationalWikians (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete - No article on RationalWiki, so a user category can't facilitate collaboration. Allowing a category for members of every non-notable wiki would open the door for thousands of similar categories, so we need to limit this to ones that have articles. VegaDark (talk) 01:29, 15 April 2010 (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:Wikipedians who contribute to the Club Penguin Wikis

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:  Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 April 22. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Wikipedians who contribute to the Club Penguin Wiki (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete - No article on the Club Penguin Wiki, so a user category can't facilitate collaboration. Allowing a category for members of every non-notable wiki would open the door for thousands of similar categories, so we need to limit this to ones that have articles. VegaDark (talk) 01:29, 15 April 2010 (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:Wikipedians who contribute to Memory Gamma

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:  Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 April 22. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Wikipedians who contribute to Memory Gamma (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete - No article on the Memory Gamma, so a user category can't facilitate collaboration. Allowing a category for members of every non-notable wiki would open the door for thousands of similar categories, so we need to limit this to ones that have articles. VegaDark (talk) 01:29, 15 April 2010 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_April_15&oldid=1142606211"