< April 21 April 23 >

April 22

Category:20th century refugees ennobled in the UK

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 to Category:Refugees ennobled in the United Kingdom. There's consensus to do something, but no consensus to listify or delete. The trend toward removing "20th century" suggests that should be done at minimum. No prejudice against relisting the new category if desired.--Mike Selinker (talk) 04:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:20th century refugees ennobled in the UK (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. This is an unusual category and I'm not quite sure what to make of it. It combines three things: refugee status, century, and eventual notable achievement of the person. It doesn't have any immediate logical parents, like Category:20th-century refugees or Category:Refugees ennobled in the United Kingdom. It could be misread as suggesting that they were ennobled when they were refugees, which of course is not true. On balance, given it's problems, I suggest deletion, unless someone has a better idea. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:43, 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:Gordon J. Laing Award

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. — ξxplicit 06:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Gordon J. Laing Award (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Eponymous award category being used to categorize winners, which are already listified at Gordon J. Laing Award. Wikipedia:OCAT#Award_recipients applies. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:23, 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:Israeli companies operating in the occupied 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: Speedy Delete as a recreation of deleted content and as an empty category. Also for this nomination WP:SNOW. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:44, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Israeli companies operating in the occupied territories (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: WP:POINTy category that was created to avoid the delete conclusion of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 April 1#Category:Companies operating in Israeli-occupied territories — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 22:01, 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:Joseph Campbell

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) 09:45, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Joseph Campbell (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: This is a category full of articles related to Joseph Campbell, many of them biographies of other people e.g. Jackie Onassis. Since those articles may be safely accessed by wikilink if they are relevant, and there is a navbox for Joseph campbell already, I don't see this category as necessary. TheGrappler (talk) 21:47, 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:Cornish immigrants to the United States

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. — ξxplicit 06:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Cornish immigrants to the United States to Category:English immigrants to the United States
Nominator's rationale: too narrow a distinction to make and without precedent (no Category:Cornish emigrants, Category:Cornish expatriates etc.) Mayumashu (talk) 20:08, 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:Privately owned Government companies in India

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 under G3 - Vandalism. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Privately owned Government companies in India to Category:Government-owned companies in India
Nominator's rationale: The title of this category is oxymoronic: if a company is privately-owned, it's not a govt company. However the category does appear to be for state-owned enterprises, so I suggest merging to the existing Category:Government-owned companies in India. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ξxplicit 20:03, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon (talk) 19:30, 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:People from Nyeri, Kenya

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 to Category:People from Nyeri District. -- Black Falcon (talk) 17:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:People from Nyeri, Kenya to Category:People from Nyeri District
Nominator's rationale: Nyeri is but a town while the district in which it is located (Nyeri District) does not have a 'People from' category page. (Note: Nyeri, Kenya redirects to Nyeri) Mayumashu (talk) 18:46, 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:People from Central Province

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 to Category:People from Central Province (Kenya). -- Black Falcon (talk) 17:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:People from Central Province to Category:People from Central Province (Kenya)
Nominator's rationale: to disambiguate as there are several places Central Province and to match Central Province (Kenya) Mayumashu (talk) 18:40, 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:Highly Hazardous Chemicals

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: Listify. There seems to be enough interest in keeping the material, but the specificity to one U.S. agency doesn't garner consensus for keeping it.--Mike Selinker (talk) 04:20, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Highly Hazardous Chemicals (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. A specific list of chemicals from a specific regulatory body does not a category make. An article, maybe. (but even then the capitalisation is not warranted per http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_id=9761&p_table=standards) . Rich Farmbrough, 17:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC). 17:35, 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:Television shows with named seasons

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. -- Black Falcon (talk) 17:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Television shows with named seasons to Category:Television series with named seasons
Nominator's rationale: Rename. This is a very odd category, uniting such disparate programs as Avatar: The Last Airbender, Ugly Betty, and Real World/Road Rules Challenge under a perhaps specious banner. The reason I brought it here, though, is that like all subcategories of Category:Television series, it should use "series" rather than "shows." I'm not opposed to a delete result either.--Mike Selinker (talk) 11:15, 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: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: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:24, 3 May 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]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:38, 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: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: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:23, 3 May 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]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Rich Farmbrough, 17:46, 22 April 2010 (UTC).[reply]
1) Per WP:USERCAT, the purpose of user categories is to aid in facilitating coordination and collaboration between users for the improvement and development of the encyclopedia. A few thousand user categories that don't do this (or even one) dilutes the goal of user categories and therefore causes harm by merely existing. 2) In that case a more appropriate category would be Category:Wikipedians interested in Club Penguin. Such a category runs the risk of being too narrow to adequately foster collaboration, however. Usually user categories should encompass at least 4-5 potential articles to collaborate on, otherwise talk pages are more appropriate. VegaDark (talk) 23:32, 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: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: delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:23, 3 May 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]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:38, 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:People of Kohanim descent

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) 00:21, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:People of Kohanim descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. This is an unnecessary category which overlaps Category:Kohanim. For people who are not Kohanim in the eyes of halakha (Jewish law) — such as a man whose maternal grandfather was a Kohen — the classification of "Kohanim descent" has no halachic value and is at most a coffee-table tidbit. A woman whose father is a Kohen (called a bat Kohen in Jewish law) might be included in Category:Kohanim, although this would probably be important only to Conservative Jewish women, who might want their own category, Category:Women kohanim. Yoninah (talk) 08:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete First of all, I completely agree with the nominator. Another strong argument to delete this category is that the specific ancestry of being descended from a kohen but not being a kohen yourself is never considered, mentioned, valued etc. It is not notable, so to say. Debresser (talk) 16:41, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am looking through all the names in this category and adding the categorization of Category:Kohanim where applicable, so that they will be categorized as kohanim somewhere. I'm finding that quite a few people, men and women, who have "Cohen" as a surname have been placed in Category:People of Kohanim descent, which is not necessarily correct, since Jewish families often changed their names to Cohen to avoid the draft (as in 19th century Russia). Yoninah (talk) 19:17, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. A Bas Kohen does have some halachic issues that apply regarding terumah, etc. but that is b/c as long as she does not marry a non-Kohen, she is a Koheness and such may eat terumos etc. -- Avi (talk) 14:28, 23 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:Converts to Orthodox independent denominations from Eastern Orthodoxy

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 both. -- Black Falcon (talk) 17:31, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Converts to Orthodox independent denominations from Eastern Orthodoxy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Category:Converts to Old Believers from Eastern Orthodoxy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. These two categories are kind of meaningless. The people in the categories left or were excommunicated from one Eastern Orthodox church and joined a different Eastern Orthodox Church. The Old Believers are a movement within Eastern Orthodoxy. None of these people converted from Eastern Orthodoxy at all, they just became associated with different churches in the overall movement. It would kind of be like saying, "Converts to Sufism from Islam" or "Converts to Methodism from Protestantism". Doesn't make sense. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:00, 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:Self-released albums

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:33, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Self-released albums to Category:Independent albums
Nominator's rationale: To clarify that these albums were released independent of externally owned or operated record labels. Note that the main article is independent music. Alternatively, it can be renamed Category:Independently-released albums. — ξxplicit 04:01, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Self-released albums would be independently-released, but if anything, they should be a subcatregory. Simply put, releasing an album yourself and releasing it on SST are two different things, even if both of those mean that you are avoiding the Big Four. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:06, 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:Works by Aoi Nishimata

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:00, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Works by Aoi Nishimata (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: With only three articles, all of which are listed in her biography, this category is completely unnecessary. Even if all of the works she has been involved with are included, it would only be 7 articles. —Farix (t | c) 01:07, 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:Whitegoods manufacturers of China

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 to Category:Home appliance manufacturers of China. -- Black Falcon (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Whitegoods manufacturers of China to Category:Home appliance manufacturers of China
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Whitegoods refers to major appliances, which is a subtype of what WP calls home appliances. As the article home appliance says, "Traditionally, home appliances are classified into: Major appliances (or "White goods") [and] Small appliances (or "Brown goods")." This category belongs in the parent Category:Home appliance manufacturers, and should be renamed accordingly. Right now there is no subgroup of Category:Major appliance manufacturers. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:03, 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:Volcanoes by Volcanic Explosivity Index

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 to Category:Volcanoes by highest known Volcanic Explosivity Index of eruption. Consensus does not exist to do anything in this nomination. However, all participants agree that the category title, and thus all the subcategory titles, contain a factual inaccuracy. So while the utility of the category has not been agreed to be low, the category title must change to be one that isn't wrong. I picked the best name I could find from the nomination, but certainly don't think it's great. Further nominations are recommended, and they should include the subcategories.Mike Selinker (talk) 04:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Volcanoes by Volcanic Explosivity Index (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. VEI is not a characteristic of volcanoes but of eruptions. A volcano cannot have a VEI. Thus, this category and its subcategories are meaningless. 94.196.237.72 (talk) 00:10, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to 'eruptions' doesn't work as they are all volcanoes, not eruptions. And none of the subcats are tagged. Occuli (talk) 12:13, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Then perhaps they should be renamed as well. Very small scale VEI eruptions, such as VEI-1 and 2, are common at volcanoes and those volcano cats (Category:VEI-1 volcanoes and Category:VEI-2 volcanoes) can easily be over populated. Thus, overcategorizing would be become a problem. It is better off renaming all VEI volcano categories to VEI volcanic eruption categories because that would prevent volcano articles becoming overpopulated with VEI categories. There is currently one VEI-2 eruption article (2004–2008 volcanic activity of Mount St. Helens), one VEI-4 eruption article (1888 eruption of Mount Bandai, two VEI-5 eruption articles (Hekla 3 eruption, 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens), two VE1-6 eruption articles (1883 eruption of Krakatoa, Avellino eruption), three VEI-7 eruption articles (Hatepe eruption, Akahoya eruption, Minoan eruption (which was either VEI-6 or 7)) and one VEI-8 eruption article (Oruanui eruption) and others in Category:Volcanic events I did not noted. BT (talk) 13:12, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Volcanoes with VEI-X eruptions could solve the problem for the VEI-X volcano categories. BT (talk) 13:23, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Volcanoes with VEI-X eruptions seems problematic to me, since almost all volcanoes will have produced a small eruption at some point. We'd have to rely on editors being sensible and only applying categories that are a defining characteristic of the volcano, but I suspect this may not work out well. If people are keen on renaming the existing categories, I think Category:Volcanoes whose most explosive eruption was VEI-X comes close to matching what they currently contain. -- Avenue (talk) 14:08, 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.
More