< January 24 January 26 >

January 25

Category:College soccer in Canada

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. I suppose this qualifies as speedy criterion #4. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:36, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:College soccer in Canada to Category:University and college soccer in Canada
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Convention of Category:University and college sports in Canada . --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 23:42, 25 January 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:Films about Stalinism

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:Films about the Soviet Union in the Stalin era; may be renominated if anyone comes up with a better name. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:34, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Films about Stalinism (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Miscategorized and arbitrary category, filled with unrelated films. How can, say, The North Star (1943 film), be in category:Films about Soviet repression? In general, the category "films about <some abstract notion>" is poorly-defined. "films about socialism", "films about christianity", etc. - Altenmann >t 18:52, 25 January 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:Stalinism in 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: delete Category:Stalinism in the United States, Category:Stalinism by country, and Category:Stalinism in the United Kingdom. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:58, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Stalinism in the United States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. An arbitrary category without evidence that such a concept exists or existed. - Altenmann >t 18:48, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Creator's Rationale: Preserve. Prior to Khrushchev's Secret Speech, the Communist Party USA was unabashedly Pro-Stalin. If one doubts that such a movement existed in the United States, one need only read the memoirs of David Horowitz and Ronald Radosh, both of whom grew up in American Stalinist families during the 1930s, '40s, and '50s. During the 1930s, there were also a large number of Americans who emigrated to the Soviet Union expecting to find utopia. In reality, almost all were caught up in the paranoia of Stalin's Great Purge. I created this category to include both members of the American Communist Party from the Stalin era, Soviet intelligence assets, and "fellow travellers," who moved within the orbit of the movement without necessarily being Party members. Kingstowngalway (talk) 15:27, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The overlapping categories Category:Communist Party USA, category Category:American communists and sub category Category:Members of the Communist Party USA should (and perhaps already do) hold these entries. There is no article Stalinism in the United States. What the creator seems to have done is create something like Category:American communists in the 1930s and 1940s which is not what Stalinism means. There would also need to be specific sourcing beyond simply party membership, which is not possible for a category. Also propose deleting Category:Stalinism by country and Category:Stalinism in the United Kingdom which has Ewan MacColl for goodness'sake! --Sussexonian (talk) 22:06, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - agree with Sussexonian. Category:Stalinism is generally useful and includes theories and events specifically connected with Stalin's thought. There isn't enough to warrant splitting this by country so Category:Stalinism by country and its subcategories are collections of things connected with communism while Stalin was in power - not useful, and should be deleted. The related subcategory Category:Functionaries of the Stalinist regime in Poland may or may not be useful, but should certainly be renamed if kept. Warofdreams talk 23:46, 27 January 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:21st-century Canadian people

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:
--Xdamrtalk 04:16, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Canadian people by century to Category:Canadian people
Propose merging Category:21st-century Canadian people (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

21st-century should be deleted. Unless we going to create one for every century and every country. RandySavageFTW (talk) 17:02, 25 January 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.

Philippine literature-related categories

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: Split decision. Delete Category:Filipino online literature writers, Keep Category:Short story collections by Filipino writers. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:37, 5 February 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) 16:27, 25 January 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:Disney Princess franchise

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:Disney Princess and then we'll go from there. Users may create other subcategories if thought appropriate. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:30, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Disney Princess franchise to Category:Disney Princess merchandise
Nominator's rationale: The category as it is named right now is, as the lead says, for merchandise of the franchise. The actual category for the "Disney Princess franchise" is Category:Disney Princess, which includes the characters in the franchise and the main franchise article itself. --LoЯd ۞pεth 00:05, 18 January 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) 16:15, 25 January 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.

Filipino to Philippine

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 except Category:Filipino deities and Category:Filipino goddesses. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:00, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming
Nominator's rationale: Rename. This is a follow-up nomination to this nomination. The Philippines Manual of Style states:
  • Philippine is generally used with inanimate objects. Example, Philippine National Anthem or Philippine Senate.
  • Filipino may be used with either inanimate objects or people, though preference swings towards the latter. It is also the name of the national language.
Accordingly, I have nominated the inanimate object categories that use "Filipino" for a change to the preferred "Philippine". Although using "Philippine" is not a required hard-and-fast rule, I think it would be beneficial to use the most common adjective in these cases. Some categories that use "Philippine" as an adjective already exist; they are not listed here. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:29, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most are pretty much textbook MOS issues, so support all but those three. The other three seem like they could go either way; but since we tend to talk about gods as if they were people in English, I tend to say leave those three alone. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 10:44, 12 January 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) 16:02, 25 January 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:FC Salyut-Energia Belgorod players

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) 02:53, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:FC Salyut-Energia Belgorod players to Category:FC Salyut Belgorod players
Nominator's rationale: The club has been renamed from FC Salyut-Energia back to FC Salyut: http://www.fc-salyut.ru/news.php. Geregen2 (talk) 13:36, 25 January 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:Phantasm

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 07:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Phantasm to Category:Phantasm (film series)
Nominator's rationale: Rename or delete. Suggest at minimum disambiguating. Phantasm is ambiguous. Not sure we even need it to house just 4 films, though, especially when Template:Phantasm exists. Good Ol’factory (talk) 14:51, 5 January 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 08:21, 25 January 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:Canadian Football League Draft

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: Don't rename. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming Category:Canadian Football League Draft to Category:Canadian College Draft
Nominator's rationale: Per main article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:28, 25 January 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:Late Night (NBC)

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 today's CfD page. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:35, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Late Night (NBC) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Limited content base - articles on 3 iterations of the same show, one which has it own also included, subcategory. J Greb (talk) 05:02, 17 January 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 06:42, 25 January 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:Scribal works

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 16:33, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Scribal works (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Anything written before the invention(s) of printing could be called a scribal work, I suppose. If the term has a real meaning, it is not reflected in the random category contents, which are properly covered by dozens if not hundreds of other categories. If the intention was to capture works not included in a more narrow definition of "literary works", hardly any of the current contents reflect this. Johnbod (talk) 18:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have added to the nom. Are there any reasons at all for keeping it? Johnbod (talk) 21:18, 16 January 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 06:29, 25 January 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:Hurricanes and tropical depressions of the Gulf of California

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 today's CfD page. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:30, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Hurricanes and tropical depressions of the Gulf of California (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessarily duplicate of Category:Pacific hurricanes. No precedence exists for by-region storm categories. –Juliancolton | Talk 02:48, 25 January 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:African American astronauts

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:
--Xdamrtalk 04:21, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:African American astronauts (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
added later by BHG:
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Wikipedia policy wisely states, "categories should not be based on race unless the race has a specific relation to the topic" and gives the example, "Category:African American economists should not exist." 67.132.197.172 (talk) 01:04, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a difference? To WPedians there is an important, techinical meaning of the word "categorized". But to NASA? If they have a list, that is the same a the common-parlance definition of "to categorize", is it not? --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 06:08, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RandomCritic (talk) 17:38, 26 January 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