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) 01:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Most article links have little relation to the cryptocurrency. Delete per WP:SMALLCATJtbobwaysf (talk) 17:51, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, the category only contains two topic articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:08, 10 April 2021 (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:Uncanny valley
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) 01:31, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Propose deletingCategory:Uncanny valley (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: The category seems too narrow. The only pages to have this as a category are films that critics have opted to having the uncanny valley, such as The Polar Express or Cats (2019 film); none of the articles are directly connected to the entire concept of the uncanny valley. So this category feels more like WP:FancruftYoshiman6464♫🥚 17:05, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Surely, then, this is a case of undercategorising rather than deletion. As you imply, the uncanny valley refers to a lot of things other than movies. This is a category which could be filled and useful. Grutness...wha? 01:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The solution seems to be to expand the scope of the category instead of deleting it. Dimadick (talk) 20:36, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If this is meant to be about works perceived to have an uncanny valley aesthetic rather than the concept of the uncanny valley, then it fails WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:34, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing in its description suggests that it is, and the contents have now been expanded to include other items related directly to the concept of the uncanny valley. Grutness...wha? 12:11, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NONDEF with no objection to recreating the category once there is a handful of articles about the uncanny valley concept. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:06, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There now are a handful (or more) which are about just that. Grutness...wha? 12:11, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, uncanny valley is not a defining characteristic of the articles that have been added. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:03, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This appears to be partially subjective, and partially related concepts for which "uncanny valley" isn't a defining attribute. Trivialist (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this is way to subjective to categorize by.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:25, 6 April 2021 (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:Television programming blocks established in 1905
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-delete as nonsense/vandalism. DMacks (talk) 18:06, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Propose deletingCategory:Television programming blocks established in 1905 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Television never existed in 1905. FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 14:56, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete - The user who created appears to be a troll; they also claimed that Nick Jr. was a channel established in 1905 - which is udder nonsense as Nickelodeon wasn't established until 1979. Yoshiman6464♫🥚 17:08, 3 April 2021 (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:1905 in television
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-delete as nonsense/vandalism. DMacks (talk) 18:06, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Propose deletingCategory:1905 in television (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Television never existed in 1905. FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 14:55, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete - The user who created appears to be a troll; they also claimed that Nick Jr. was a channel established in 1905 - which is udder nonsense as Nickelodeon wasn't established until 1979. Yoshiman6464♫🥚 17:07, 3 April 2021 (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:1900s in television
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-delete as nonsense/vandalism. DMacks (talk) 18:06, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Propose deletingCategory:1900s in television (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Television never existed in the 1900s. FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 14:54, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete - The user who created appears to be a troll; they also claimed that Nick Jr. was a channel established in 1905 - which is udder nonsense as Nickelodeon wasn't established until 1979. Yoshiman6464♫🥚 17:08, 3 April 2021 (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:Films with screenplays by J. Mahendran
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:Recipients of the Order of Civil Merit (Syria)
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) 01:30, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Propose Deleting/Listifying Category:Recipients of the Order of Civil Merit (Syria)
4 Accomplished Syrian Civilians: This is the stated purpose of the award so this seemed the most likely to be defining but it's not treated that way in article like singer Sabah Fakhri, writer Muhammad al-Maghut, and comedian Duraid Lahham
Regardless of the reason, the articles generally list the award in passing with other honours, if at all. There wasn't a list so I created one right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete we really need to cut back this overcat by award.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:26, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Unlike some others, this order does seem to be used to honour those who have actually achieved something within their own country. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:55, 12 April 2021 (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:Recipients of Dannebrogordenens Hæderstegn
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) 01:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Propose Deleting Category:Recipients of Dannebrogordenens Hæderstegn
The Order of the Dannebrog is a Danish award and we can discuss Category:Order of the Dannebrog in a future nomination. At issue here is the Dannebrogordenens Hæderstegn ("Cross of Honour of the Order of the Dannebrog") which is now a supplemental award for people who have already won the Order of the Dannebrog and are already categorized by it. It used to be a separate award though but we only have two articles from that earlier version (Henning Jakob Henrik Lund and Daniel Larsen Schevig) and neither seems defined by the award. There wasn't a list so I created one right here in the main article for any reader interested in the topic. - RevelationDirect (talk) 00:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:59, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete very clear overcategorization by award.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:26, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Unlike some others, this award does seem to be used to honour those who have actually achieved something. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The first person in the category is in 16 award categories. "honoring based on achievement" is not the threshold. It is defining to the people who receive it. These people are not notable for getting the award, they are notable for other things.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:28, 14 April 2021 (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.