The result of the debate was Delete. - TexasAndroid 19:02, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete. The category states, "These articles concern United States federal legislation that are of historic significance, but are no longer in complete effect." However, few statutes are in complete effect as many get modified over time. I think I understand the intent of this category, however. I just can't find a way to express it in a rename. Frankly, I'm afraid there's really no true reason to have this category and there's no useful standard by which articles could be added. Therefore, the articles in this category ought to be recategorized into Category:United States federal legislation or one of that category's subcategories (such as Category:United States federal labor legislation. —Markles 01:19, 31 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was no consensous. - TexasAndroid 19:19, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Categories Migratory birds (Eastern hemisphere) and Migratory birds (Western hemisphere) should, I feel, be renamed. Many species in either hemisphere are to some extent migratory, but with some resident populations. These categories on the other hand appear to have been set up to contain only those species which are obligate long-distance (?trans-equatorial) migrants (i.e. Europe to sub-Saharan Africa or North to South America). The hemisphere aspect to the name is also misleading as it leaves northern Asian breeders migrating to south/south-east Asia without a category. Better terminology exists, and we should base our category names on this instead. SP-KP 23:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, so I propose Category:Transequatorial migrant birds as our top-level category, with three subcategories for the New World, Europe/Africa and Asia/Australasia. SP-KP 17:36, 31 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Rename all. - TexasAndroid 18:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Based on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television) several hundred pages have been renamed. However several shows - listed below - have categories associated with them that also need to be renamed according to the convention. None of the items in the category have been removed or altered. If you know of any other shows please add them here. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 22:55, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rename as nominator --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 22:55, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Merge. - TexasAndroid 19:18, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This adds nothing but another thing to click to. It makes seeing what is available in Category:Travel writers more difficult and thereby discourages subcategorisation of that category. Merge Bhoeble 22:37, 30 March 2006 (UTC).Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Delete. - TexasAndroid 19:04, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Poorly defined and impractical category, currently only contains Harry Potter. Could possibly be made into a list (if someone can be bothered). the wub "?!" 22:09, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was delete. - TexasAndroid 19:09, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We don't categorize films by actors, nor do we create categories to duplicate "what links here"; the creator of this category, who has also reposted the CFD'd "Category:Seagaliana" a few times, added it to articles such as victim, chokehold, and Tibetan Buddhism. Useless. Postdlf 20:12, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Delete. - TexasAndroid 19:06, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete. Too specific; there isn't even a demoscene musicians category yet! Use Category:Demosceners until there are enough to split off a Demoscene musicians category. --Vossanova 18:43, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Merge. - TexasAndroid 18:15, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Barely populated; incorrect name structure; incorrect capitalisation; not a standard category type as the usual practice is to have Category:Paris culture and more detailed subcategories for things like music. delete Merchbow 18:04, 30 March 2006 (UTC).Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Merge. - TexasAndroid 18:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rename to match category:Cemeteries in France etc. Merchbow 17:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC).Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Withdrawn. - TexasAndroid 17:30, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Chronology and Timeline are the same thing so there is no need for separate categories. Timeline seems to be the term most used and in any case Category:Chronology is misnamed (should be plural) so I suggest merging them to Category:Timelines. JeffW 17:42, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Rename. - TexasAndroid 18:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Per naming conventions of other college athletic teams, e.g. Category:Oklahoma Sooners or Category:Nebraska Cornhuskers. jareha (comments) 17:01, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Speedy deleted. - TexasAndroid 17:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not the way things are done. Schools and higher education institutions are only put in the same category at education level. (Note that in the UK there are many schools called "College", eg Eton College, but for purposes of classification they are schools. Rename Carina22 16:26, 30 March 2006 (UTC).Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Rename. - TexasAndroid 18:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I propose spelling out two abbreviations—
Category:BJP leaders → Category:Bharatiya Janata Party leaders
Category:INC leaders → Category:Indian National Congress leaders
— to avoid any potential ambiguity.- choster 16:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Withdrawn. - TexasAndroid 19:01, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Seems more logical and less elitist to organise by geography. Category:Schools in Gloucestershire already exists with at present 2 geographical subcategories created by me for Cheltenham and Gloucester. --kingboyk 15:03, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was no consensous. - TexasAndroid 18:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Suggesting change as per naming style used at Category:Visitor attractions by city. -- Longhair 10:24, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Rename. - TexasAndroid 18:18, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Suggesting change as per naming style used at Category:Visitor attractions by city. -- Longhair 10:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Rename. - TexasAndroid 18:19, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
changes USAF from acronym to full name, change "Thunderbird" to "Thunderbird pilot" - little more specific Nobunaga24 05:59, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Rename. - TexasAndroid 18:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is a follow up to the nomination of category:English MPs which someone made a week ago. The category needs a name which reflects what it is for (ie not MPs who of Scottish ethnicity or sit for Scottish constituencies) and it also needs to be distinct for Category:Members of the Scottish Parliament, which is for the current Parliament, which was created a few years ago after nearly 300 years during which Scotland didn't have a parliament. Carina22 04:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC).Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Delete. - TexasAndroid 19:08, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think it's appropriate to categorize articles on the basis of internal Wikipedia matters like whether they have logo galleries or not...and even if consensus here is that it's worth keeping, it would still have to be renamed for capitalization to Category:American television stations with logo galleries. I suggest deletion, but I'm willing to listen to a convincing argument otherwise. Bearcat 03:47, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The result of the debate was Rename to Category:Limited-access roads. - TexasAndroid 19:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Change name to take into account European usage. SilkTork 00:18, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]