< April 26 April 28 >

April 27

Category:Major British cities

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. Kbdank71 13:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Major British cities (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Barring some sort of legal or official classification as a "Major City", which I am not aware of, this means of classification can only be done in a POV way or by using arbitrary inclusionary criteria, which if there are any are not defined. Notified creator with ((subst:cfd-notify)) Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:11, 27 April 2008 (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:Japanese expatriate footballers

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 both. Kbdank71 15:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest merging Category:Japanese footballers in Europe, Category:Japanese footballers in South America to Category:Japanese expatriate footballers
Nominator's rationale: convention (as it stands) does not have it to categorize people by occupation by continent; suggested merger would fit the largely established rubric Category:Expatriate footballers by nationality Mayumashu (talk) 22:56, 27 April 2008 (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:Arab Air Carriers Organization

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. Kbdank71 13:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Arab Air Carriers Organization to Category:Arab Air Carriers Organization members
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Clarify what the contents of the category are. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:02, 27 April 2008 (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:Bands with female lead singers

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. Kbdank71 13:23, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Bands with female lead singers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: There is no specific notability for a band that has a female lead singer; thousands of mixed-gender groups exist (keep in mind that Category:Mixed-gender musical groups was deleted). We already have Category:All-women bands for the rare cases of all-women bands, which are possibly notable given their relative rarity. As the size of this category indicates, this is indiscriminate overcategorization; there's no Category:Bands with male lead singers is there? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 18:56, 27 April 2008 (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:G-Unit Records articles with comments

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. Kbdank71 13:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:G-Unit Records articles with comments (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete - whether an article has comments on its talk page is a trivial basis for categorization. Otto4711 (talk) 14:20, 27 April 2008 (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:Joint venture G-Unit Records artists

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: upmerge. Kbdank71 13:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Joint venture G-Unit Records artists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete - categorizing artists by the method through which they are signed to a particular record label is overcategorization. Otto4711 (talk) 14:15, 27 April 2008 (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:G'$ Up

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. Kbdank71 13:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:G'$ Up (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete - unnecessary eponymous overcategorization for a record label's sub-label. Otto4711 (talk) 14:13, 27 April 2008 (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:Crime Mob

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. Kbdank71 13:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Crime Mob (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete - unnecessary eponymous overcategorization. Otto4711 (talk) 14:12, 27 April 2008 (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:M.O.P.

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. Kbdank71 13:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:M.O.P. (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete - completely unnecessary eponymous overcategorization. Part of a walled garden for G-Unit that was previously dismantled but is now back under construction. Otto4711 (talk) 14:09, 27 April 2008 (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.

Crime by city in the US

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 all. Kbdank71 13:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By prior precedent, most city articles and categories for US cities include the ", state" after the name of the city.

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.

Sports teams by city in the US

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 all. Kbdank71 13:28, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By prior precedent, most city articles and categories for US cities include the ", state" after the name of the city. All of these categories' parents are of that form (links provided, because I'm such a nice guy). Only the categories relating to cities have been nominated. Categories such as Category:Sports in the Dallas-Fort Worth area or Category:Sports in the Quad Cities which sometimes cloud the issue have been left off my list. Neier (talk) 13:03, 27 April 2008 (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:Massacres by Americans

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. Kbdank71 13:39, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Massacres by Americans (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: mostly redundant to Category:Massacres in the United States, overcategorizing HokieRNB (talk) 11:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In light of the broad scope of this discussion I have posted notice of this CFD at the talk pages for WikiProject Human rights and WikiProject Military history. Cgingold (talk) 02:11, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Its already in a massacre category. What category should Nanking Massacre be in to indicate it was perpetrated by Asians? Category:Massacres by Asians? Category:Massacres by the Empire of Japan? What about My Trach Massacre? Category:Massacres by Europeans? Category:Massacres by the French? The Virginia Tech massacre, which is supposedly part of this category, was perpetrated by Seung-Hui Cho (which wikipedia lists was "a South Korean national") Which category should be used to indicate that it was perpetrated by South Korean Nationals living in the USA with green cards? Category:Massacres by South Korean Nationals living in the Commonwealth of Virginia? The answer is that they are already in a Massacre category and additional categorization is not needed. --Dual Freq (talk) 00:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Well, there were many massacres by U.S. forces within the U.S., as seen in the cats Category:Massacres of Native Americans and Category:Indian massacres. The key is that U.S. forces actually perpetrated the Indian massacres and the Vietnamese massacres; as it stands such massacres perpetrated by states are not categorized as such, but simply by the nation in which they occurred. Thus, someone looking for massacres perpetrated by U.S. forces would need to look through all 100+ "massacres in X country" categories, and read all the articles, in order to find them. That seems a problem. The Virginia Tech massacre was not perpetrated by United States forces, so it's not relevant here. Badagnani (talk) 02:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The creator of this category added the Virginia Tech Massacre to this category. --Dual Freq (talk) 11:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This unfortunate posting shows the typical lack of prior reading typical of many "delete page regular" voters. If the term "massacre" were so poorly understood or defined, we wouldn't have an article for it, nor any categories with this term. This is not the issue or question at hand. Badagnani (talk) 02:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - If you have "no issue with recording where a massacre occurred or under whose purported authority," it's best to simply suggest a different name for the category than simply vote "Strong delete." Badagnani (talk) 02:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Response - Categories by nationality (and America being a case which is less strongly aligned with ethnicity, but ethnicity plays here as well) are open to abuse by those having an axe to grind. Perhaps "Bank robberies by Poles"? I find the whole notion of categories of "BAD THING X done by nationality/ethnicity Y" to be intellectually repugnant, not just editorially divisive. Finding a different name for a thing doesn't change the thing itself. And, upon further consideration, I (partially, stricken) withdraw my "I have no issue with" as, in the end, by country/authority is open to the same abuse. If the editorial community has come to a consensus that "Massacre X took place at location Y," that is all we should categorize by. —PētersV (talk) 13:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not taking a position, but I did point out above that were we to create such a category tree, the sub-cats would be called "Category:Massacres committed by country Xyz". Cgingold (talk) 05:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Comment doesn't make sense at all; indeed, we have articles with "massacre" in the title and those articles refer, by editor consensus, to massacres. It's quite clear. Despite my very clear comment above, the editor just above neglects to point out how an editor looking for massacres committed by agents of the United States may find such, without looking through every subcategory of "massacres committed in X country," and reading every article, to determine which were committed by agents of the United States. Please actually address the comments and questions raise without needlessly introducing confusion where there is none (specifically by presenting hypotheticals about the supposed lack of knowledge on the part of our editors of what the word "massacre" means). We shouldn't be in the business of minimizing or maximizing actual events, simply properly documenting and categorizing all of them. I ask again, if a researcher is using Wikipedia to look for actual massacres, comprising WP articles that have "massacre" in the title of the article by WP consensus, perpetrated by agents of the United States, how would they find those without closely inspecting every such article? As mentioned above, there is no such difficulty in locating massacres of American Indians and massacres by American Indians, so our predecessors designed those categories well. Badagnani (talk) 04:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - We have lots of categories here in which American just means individuals from the United States. American movies can not mean movies from Paraguay. In my opinion the title of this category is clear. The opinions of the delete-voters here can relate to choosing a better title for this category or ommiting or adding one article to it but it does not challenge the existence of the category itself at all.--Mani1 (talk) 08:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Could you explain why you added the Virginia Tech Massacre to this category? A massacre that appears to have been committed by a South Korean National? You created the category and from the items you added to it, it's not clear what items you think should be added to the category. I don't see any reason that Massacres need to be sub-categorized by nationality, continent, race, religion, ethnicity, or sex. Massacres in country is adequate for sub-categorization. --Dual Freq (talk) 11:42, 28 April 2008 (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:United Nations Intelligence Taskforce

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: no consensus. Kbdank71 13:36, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest merging Category:United Nations Intelligence Taskforce to Category:UNIT
Nominator's rationale: Merge, This a is follow-up to the page rename of United Nations Intelligence Taskforce to UNIT. Although acoronyms are usually avoided in categories, an exception should be made in this case to match the article, and due to the dispute over whether the old or new name of the organisation should be used. See Talk:UNIT#Requested move for more details. Tim! (talk) 07:26, 27 April 2008 (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 Mission

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. Kbdank71 13:36, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:People from Mission to Category:People from Mission, British Columbia
Nominator's rationale: This category is propose for renaming, I type the search "Mission", a lot of specific names is named "Mission", then I type the search "Mission, British Columbia" This is the only search to match with the renamed article. This category must be renamed. Steam5 (talk) 03:10, 27 April 2008 (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.
More