< March 29 March 31 >

March 30

Category:Presidents of the Club of Madrid

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. The current and former president who were in this category are both mentioned in the text of the article. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Better as if this list appears in the body of the article Club of Madrid. As a category it is non-defining. Rathfelder (talk) 20:33, 30 March 2016 (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:Instrumental and vocal genres

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 for deletion or merging, nor for keeping the present combined category, so rename per nomination, moving sub-cat Category:Vocal music up into Category:Music genres. – Fayenatic London 12:49, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename the category and relocate the subcategory Category:Vocal music directly "one step ahead" in the tree to Category:Music genres. The category consists entirely of instrumental music subcategories and articles - and then there is also Category:Vocal music. Is it important to have these two together in the first place? I can see that they are the opposite of each other, but is a combined category required, if they really are just two genres with nothing in common? CN1 (talk) 19:48, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • If there would be a change beyond renaming (which I'm neutral to), it would have to be upmerging instead of deleting, otherwise the content of the category gets lost. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:19, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't understand completely; what would you upmerge the category with? I thought the main problem is that there are two unrelated topics intermingled (merged) into one category. So, would splitting it (effectively what my renaming achieves) not be more locigal? CN1 (talk) 14:15, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It would then be a merge to its only parent Category:Music genres. So, to avoid misunderstandings, my view is: either follow the nomination or upmerge all of it, but surely don't delete. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:28, 10 April 2016 (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:Members of professional organizations

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:Barristers and advocates by place of call and then delete. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 16:23, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not useful or defining. The categories included would be better renamed. see above . Rathfelder (talk) 11:57, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The following two votes are from the recent aborted nomination on the same category. I'll ping both @Marcocapelle and Oculi: in case their viewpoints have shifted. RevelationDirect (talk) 17:19, 17 January 2016 (UTC) [reply]
  • I think turning it into a container category satisfactorily addresses my concerns.Rathfelder (talk) 18:48, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Glad we agree on containerisation :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:40, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: now that the CFD on the original sub-cat has been closed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Fayenatic London 17:20, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete My vote remains a delete but the category has changed a lot since nominated. Rathfelder better explains my concerns with the category in its current form. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:58, 1 April 2016 (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:Mayday Parade songs

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. WP:SMALLCAT doesn't have a cutoff for number of articles written in, but if "small" categories are not appropriate, then one article is certainly not appropriate. There are exceptions when categories are likely to expand, but this band has been active for nearly a decade. If almost all of their songs are currently non-notable and not worthy of articles, there's little chance of that spontaneously changing in the future. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 14:49, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Except for a list and one article for a song that was covered by this band, this category is simply redundant to Category:Mayday Parade albums because every single entry is a redirect to one of their albums. I don't understand the rationale behind creating a redirect for every song recorded by a band AND categorizing it in such a manner. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:18, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle:. Even if there had been no redirects none of the articles would have been "about Mayday Parade" because they would still be song articles. If, on the other hand, you believe Somebody That I Used to Know should not be a member of this category (i.e. Top 20 in 2 charts as marketed as Mayday Parade is not defining), then I would have to agree to delete a category of only redirects, too.--Richhoncho (talk) 09:05, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • By lack of existing articles it's not even possible to check if "Mayday Parade" is a defining characteristic. You seem to imply that it's not, so that merely confirms that the category should be deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:40, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Marcocapelle:. Not at all. I am suggesting that if one entry is correct then the category should remain per SMALLCAT. Or, in other words, a category should not contain ONLY redirects, but this category doesn't, does it? --Richhoncho (talk) 11:09, 9 April 2016 (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:Science and Technology in Pakistan stubs

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. – Fayenatic London 12:24, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Populated by Template:Pakistan-Science-Technology-stub (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) which I am also nominating for deletion - neither template nor category were proposed at WP:WSS/P; cat does not meet the threshold of 60 articles for a stub category, and template does not meet the 30-article threshold either. In addition to this, neither Category:Science stubs nor Category:Technology stubs are normally subdivided by country (Brazil is an anomaly). Redrose64 (talk) 09:43, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah okay, learned something new :-) My delete vote applies to both then. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:55, 9 April 2016 (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:Channelling

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:Mediumship. – Fayenatic London 11:25, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: "Channelling" is an ambiguous term. For the name of this category, I suggest "mediumistic channelling", which is the term used on the disambiguation page and in the category definition. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:58, 30 March 2016 (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:Inspired by Ramana Maharshi

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: selectively merge then delete. – Fayenatic London 11:31, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Presumably this category is meant to be for people inspired by Ramana Maharshi. We could rename it to reflect that, but it's probably better to just upmerge to the parent Category:Neo-Advaita teachers, since we usually don't categorize people based on their influences. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:50, 30 March 2016 (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:Fires beginning October 8, 1871

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. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is the only category for disasters (or anything else, for that matter) that I know of that categorizes by precise date and year. I think categorizing by year is enough for disasters, so I suggest upmerging the contents to the parent category Category:1871 fires. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:42, 30 March 2016 (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:Seattle Mariners draft picks

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. As this category (alone out of Category:Major League Baseball draft picks) contains a lot of lists, I will move those to a new Category:Lists of Seattle Mariners draft picks. – Fayenatic London 11:47, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Wikipedia:Overcategorization. Players drafted by a MLB team don't necessarily play for the Mariners; they don't always sign with the MLB team. Other players go undrafted. This is not a defining characteristic of the individuals listed in this category. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:38, 30 March 2016 (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:Articles lacking sources from 07-03-2016

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: speedily deleted, clearly created in error. – Fayenatic London 17:42, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: For some reason an article was created into this category. The article already exists at Mount Star Secondary Boarding School, and I don't think histmerge is needed. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:36, 30 March 2016 (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