< December 18 December 20 >

December 19

Category:Earthless 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: Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I've researched this band a lot and little, if anything, has been or can be said about the albums in and of themselves that would give them full articles. That's why I merged them into one page: Earthless discography, which is essentially the same thing as this category only a lot more helpful. The other categories on the redirect pages can stay, but this category is now worthless in the long run. LazyBastardGuy 23:12, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. The redirects do have other categories on them, but I'm trying to get one that only includes these redirects removed. If someone found their way to the redirects from the discography article and then to the artist category, it would lead them in a circle. I would advocate keeping it if the redirects themselves had any potential as full articles, which as I noted they do not. LazyBastardGuy 16:30, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In my opinion, the discussion makes clear why we don't need/want this category. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:58, 26 December 2013 (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:The Secret Storm characters

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 09:30, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The category consists entirely of redirect. Since there is no obvious navigational route from an article to a redirect targetted at it, this category is useful for navigation only in one direction. That function is better performed by a list, which already exists at The Secret Storm#Characters. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:25, 19 December 2013 (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:Roof and tunnel hacking

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:31, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Small category, fails WP:SMALLCAT because it is not part of a series and has little prospect of expansion. No need to keep it split out from its only parent. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:09, 19 December 2013 (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 Galesburg, Michigan

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, retain category redirect. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:34, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Small community with just 2 entries. ...William 18:18, 19 December 2013 (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:Court system of Balochistan, Pakistan

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 Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 December 29. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:39, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These are one-article categories that should be merged into the main parent category (of the articles). If the need arises, they could easily be recreated. Green Giant (talk) 17:22, 19 December 2013 (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:Bengali Hindus

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. I read the discussion after the original re-list as more illuminating than before it. It seems that the suggested merge would not provide a proper outcome, and I of course note the AfD keep, also. Therefore, overall, there is not a stable opinion that this should be deleted or merged. -Splash - tk 21:25, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Two reasons—
  1. It is a prone to addition of unsourced information. Ethnicity must be supported by reliable sources. Most of the articles in this category do not have any information or source on ethnicity and categories have been added based on common sense or surname.
  2. Categorization of people based on their religion+ethnicity is unnecessary (I am expecting some OSE arguments here, to answer that, some of those categories may be nominated for discussion too). Tito☸Dutta 21:28, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Peterkingiron: there are 5 crore+ Bengali Hindus. --Tito☸Dutta 11:58, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bengali Hindus constitute less than a third of the total Bengali speaking population of the world, i.e. they are minority among the total Bengali speaking world. Bengali Hindus constitute less than a tenth of the population both in India and Bangladesh, making them linguistic and religious minorities in respective countries. Within India, Bengali Hindus are not only limited to West Bengal, they form a fifth and three fourth of the populations in Assam and Tripura respectively. In West Bengal, Bengali Hindus constitute around two third of the population. BengaliHindu (talk) 17:31, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article Bengali people notes that 60% of Bengali people are Muslims and 40% are Hindus, with a small minority of Buddhists and Christians. -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:52, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article Bengali people does not provide any citation for the precise data that they have produced. Meanwhile I found that about.com says that 70% of Bengali people are Muslims and 30% are Hindus. Please note that the entire Hindu population of West Bengal is not Bengali speaking. There is a significant Hindi speaking and Nepali speaking Hindu population in West Bengal. Also if you look at the census data of West Bengal and Bangladesh you will find that the Muslim percentage is rising in both places. BengaliHindu (talk) 13:55, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Relisting comment: There is a weak consensus here against categorising people by this intersection of ethnicity and religion. However, none of the participants in this discussion offered any reason to stop categorising these people either as Hindu, or as Bengali. I therefore propose to close this discussion as a merge to both parent categories, i.e. Category:Hindus and Category:Bengali people. If anyone has any objection to this merger, and would prefer straihghtforward deletion, please explain why.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:48, 19 December 2013 (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:Oregon politicians who changed parties

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 09:44, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The frequency with which politicians change party varies hugely by country. In some countries (e.g. Israel) the parties in parliament frequently merge or split, and in other countries individual politicians often change parties.
However, changes of party allegiance are not a simple matter. There is a big difference between a party leader abandoning both leadership and party (e.g. Michael O'Leary) and someone changing allegiance after they have left parliament (e.g. Brian Sedgemore); grouping them together is almost misleading, or those who switched parties before they ever held public office.
That is why this topic is usually covered by lists, such as those in Category:Party switching, including the list at Party switching in the United States.
Similar categories have been deleted in the past, e.g. U.S. politicians who changed party affiliation and Canadian MPs who have crossed the floor BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:41, 19 December 2013 (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:Roman Catholic missionary orders

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 (i.e. do not rename). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:45, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
→ Propose renaming Category:Roman Catholic missionary orders to Category:Roman Catholic missionary institutes
  • Nominator's rationale: For reference, Religious institute (Catholic) explains why orders are a subset of religious institutes. "order" and "institute" are often used as synonyms but the former is a colloquialism. Elizium23 (talk) 00:12, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Canonical term is "Religious Institute" but since it is so common to use religious "order", I think it should be a redirect. ~ ScitDeiWanna talk? 07:33, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose The coloquialism is so widespread that I think COMMONNAME comes into play. If someone convinces me that is a regional English variation, I would change my opinion though.RevelationDirect (talk) 23:41, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted from 2013 November 30 to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:43, 19 December 2013 (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:Shinigami in Bleach

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu
Nominator's rationale: This category is functionally pointless after the reduction of character articles. There are only three who don't fit into it, so it should just made into a single category. TTN (talk) 20:25, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted from 2013 November 29 to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:30, 19 December 2013 (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:Fictional killers

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: manual merge to Category:Fictional characters by behavioral attribute. There is clear consensus to get rid of this category, but the discussion did not take much account of what would happen to the artuicles currently categorised here. So I will implement the closure as a manual merge: merge the subcats to Category:Fictional characters by behavioral attribute, and manually recategorise the articles. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:51, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Overly broad inchoate category capturing everything from lawmen who killed in the line of duty to characters who accidentally caused a death to fictional demons. Unlike its sub-categories, which are much more focused and can for the most part be seen as occupational. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 19:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First recategorize contents in subcats for anyone who fits, then purge, then merge to Category:Fictional characters by behavioral attribute. I concur that "killers" is rather vague, and a cannibal and an assassin have little in common (also, perhaps other people killed the food and the cannibals just ate it?) But I hope someone is willing to at least clean the category first and diffuse it to subcats as relevant, as otherwise potentially valid categorization could be missed, then the remnants (e.g. people who just, in the course of some novel, happened to kill someone by accident or in self-defence or ... it ends up being not defining, as sadly, many of our fictional heros still end up killing - wed' have to add Gandalf, and Frodo, and Bilbo, and Yoda, and Chewbacca, and ... I struggle to think of a sci-fi hero who hasn't killed someone.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:39, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted from 2013 November 29 to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:31, 19 December 2013 (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:Prize-winners of the International Johann Sebastian Bach Competition

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. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:52, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Prize-winners of the International Johann Sebastian Bach Competition (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization (WP:OC#AWARD). For info: There is a list at List of prize-winners of the International Johann Sebastian Bach Competition. The list should be upmerged to Category:Music competition winners. DexDor (talk) 06:34, 19 December 2013 (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:Princess Leia

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 articles into Category:Star Wars characters and the images into Category:Star Wars images. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. As with the recently deleted R2-D2 category, all the same reasons for deletion apply. Small category whose only growth potential comes from adding general articles for things in which the character appears. There are plenty of other categories, lists and templates for the contents that aren't problematic. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 17:41, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't have anything against Star Wars (well, except the prequels) but it's an area that attracts a lot of material that, while hella cool and all, isn't encyclopedic. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 00:37, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted from CFD 2013 November 25 to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:04, 19 December 2013 (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:Court systems of Afghanistan

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: Withdrawn for alternative strategy of expansion. Green Giant (talk) 02:19, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These two categories effectively duplicate each other. Green Giant (talk) 02:11, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator....William 12:43, 19 December 2013 (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:Rosenstolz

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 10:00, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. WP:OC#EPONYMOUS. Minimal content. Navigation very simply done through main article Rosenstolz. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:35, 19 December 2013 (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