< May 29 May 31 >

May 30

Category:Fictional United States Representatives

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. Courcelles (talk) 14:27, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Fictional United States Representatives to Category:Fictional members of the United States House of Representatives
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Propose matching name format to parent Category:Members of the United States House of Representatives. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:34, 30 May 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:TMC

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 01:15, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:TMC (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete or Rename Problematic category creator User:Nopetro has created a new ID for himself as User:Nudecline and also created this opaquely named category for the Traffic Message Channel technology. At present, there are just three articles: the parent and two on multinational corporations that happen to manufacture these systems, among other things. In the parent article, I do not see internal links to articles on individual Traffic Message Channel systems. If they can be found, rename this category to Category:Traffic Message Channel systems or some such. If they do not exist, delete until such time as they do. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:44, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The creator has added other technology manufacturing companies and makes of cars that can receive traffic message channel info -- but other than that, my rationale stands. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:54, 1 June 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:Women and psychology

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: Category was not tagged for deletion, so this will be  Relisted at 2010 JUN 21 CFD. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:14, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose deletion Category:Women and psychology
Nominator's rationale: There is no category Men and psychology. Having this category gives the impression that men are standard-humans, and women are exception-humans. Lova Falk talk 17:33, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I expanded it from 5 to 18 articles. The topic exists because of historical bias in psychology and especially psychoanalysis. Standard-human vs exception-human is not a bad description. The category covers mainstream feminine psychology and a critical perspective feminist psychology. See WP:Cat/gender. (See also male sexuality) --Pnm (talk) 07:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Where is the category "Men and psychology" so we can put male sexuality in it??? Lova Falk talk 08:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think Category:Male sexuality would be useful since most of the male psych articles are completely about sexuality. (I think masculine psychology and testosterone poisoning are the only ones that aren't.) Subcategories would be Category:Male prostitution and Category:Male homosexuality --Pnm (talk) 04:53, 4 June 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:Medical fiction

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; the distinction can be re-created if necessary in the future. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Medical fiction to Category:Medicine and health in fiction
Nominator's rationale: I've just created and populated Category:Medicine and health in fiction, and I've just found this almost empty and abandoned category, which really falls into the same area. Fences&Windows 19:31, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ξxplicit 20:48, 30 May 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:Health and fitness

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 01:15, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Health and fitness (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Seems redundant to other categories like Category:Health, Category:Exercise, etc. Seems to only exist for the purposes of a portal, but it's not being used and isn't necessary - probably as it's so vague what the category is meant for. Fences&Windows 18:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ξxplicit 20:48, 30 May 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:Syndicalist women

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 01:15, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Syndicalist women to Category:Syndicalists
Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to Category:Syndicalists per WP:OC#ARBITRARY. While I'm generally in favour of occupations by women categories where relevant, being a syndicalist is not an "occupation." Furthermore, an inspection of sibling categories in the parent Category:People by political orientation reveals that in much larger category trees for Communists, Fascists, Socialists, etc., no women categories exist. I can't see a reason to make an exception for this tiny category. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ξxplicit 20:48, 30 May 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.

Film soundtracks by artist nationality

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: do not rename. There seems to be a consensus that these categories are intended to categorize soundtracks for films that are FOOian, not soundtracks by FOOian artists. A rename proposal that would clarify the categories' meanings may be appropriate. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:09, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Canadian film soundtracks to Category:Film soundtracks by Canadian artists
Propose renaming Category:New Zealand film soundtracks to Category:Film soundtracks by New Zealand artists
Propose renaming Category:Indian film soundtracks to Category:Film soundtracks by Indian artists
Propose renaming Category:American film soundtracks to Category:Film soundtracks by American artists
Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_May_15#Albums_by_artist Alternate proposal: Delete and merge Cut out the "film" part and merge them to Category:Soundtracks_by_artist_nationality. Otherwise, we can create Category:Television soundtracks by American artists, Category:Video game soundtracks by American artists, etc. Thoughts? —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 02:32, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don't think the actors should matter at all. It should be best organised by the composer I think. Otherwise, I'm not really bothered about the move. Considering the precendence of the way the previous nomination went, I'd err on the side of Support. Munci (talk) 14:02, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Response Is it a waste of time to categorize albums by artist nationality? Either way, this scheme is going to exist, so I don't see why you're opposed to renaming it to conform with the larger scheme. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 04:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. Imagine the effort necessary to verify citizenship of all members in an orchestra (of a certain setup on a certain recording date, which itself is seldom known). One of many represented in a ST. What's the point of listing the umpteen citizenships employed by, say, Vienna Philharmonic? Whether the scheme is going to exist or not, it's useless. East of Borschov (talk) 08:23, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There are Fooian films and there are soundtrack albums to those films. These categories appear to be the intersection of the categories Fooian films and Soundtracks (or more correctly Soundtrack albums). I don't entirely object to the creation of the other categories, although I'd prefer the more general Category:Soundtrack albums by Fooian artists. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 05:01, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I hadn't seen this before. That answers my confusion. Renaming this would make it redundant with the other category. This should stay the way it is, so we have two distinct methods of categorizing soundtracks: by the nationality of the film itself, and the nationality or nationalities of the artist(s). Torchiest talk/contribs 03:27, 11 June 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:Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities

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 as nominated. 23:18, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Propose renaming Category:Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities to Category:Universities and colleges accredited by the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities
Nominator's rationale: The current category title is unclear, this rename would clarify it. TorriTorri(talk/contribs) 00:03, 30 May 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.