< September 7 September 9 >

September 8

Category:Clerks (film)

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. Timrollpickering 20:54, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only five articles and all will be pretty easily interlinked and navigable from a footer. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:44, 8 September 2018 (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.

Area codes in the United States by state

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. ℯxplicit 05:04, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT, small categories unlikely to grow. Some of these states are served exclusively by one area code, e.g. Area code 701 for North Dakota. All area codes in all states (including those not in this nomination) are already in Category:Area codes in the United States. A category is included here iff there are fewer than four articles. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:33, 8 September 2018 (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:Abbott and Costello (film series)

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 into Category:Abbott and Costello and Category:Abbott and Costello films. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:37, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Does not exclusively include films. Article Abbott and Costello (film series) does not exist. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:36, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, "films" is more accurate than "film series". Marcocapelle (talk) 17:36, 22 September 2018 (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:Stella Vine

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. Timrollpickering 20:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Unnecessary small category containing only two articles CallyMc (talk) 15:29, 8 September 2018 (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:8th-century disestablishments in Israel

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) 12:03, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete as an outlier in Category:Disestablishments in Israel by century which starts in the 20th century (to be precise, in 1948). Marcocapelle (talk) 07:41, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also Category:8th century in Israel.GreyShark (dibra) 05:15, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will do that. I created the Abbasid Caliphate tree.GreyShark (dibra) 14:19, 9 September 2018 (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:Lübeck law

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 2018 OCT 6 CFD. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:35, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Lübeck law to Category:Cities with Lübeck law
Nominator's rationale: rename since the large amount of this category consists of cities with Lübeck law rather than articles about Lübeck law itself. When this category is renamed, the first three articles may be moved to the two parent categories. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:37, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • In that case, the remaining Category:Lübeck law would only contain the eponymous article and the subcategory (because the two other topic articles should be moved up anyway). That is not very helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:27, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is what I have been considering too. It is usually mentioned early in the wp articles as if it were very defining, but that may also have been the work of one over-enthusiastic editor. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:11, 11 September 2018 (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:Data with undue precision

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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:02, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Empty cleanup category with an unclear and possibly misleading scope.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  04:15, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Or for conversions (e.g. Imperial to metric) that are more precise than the data warrants. That's really what the issue is. If the data is only precise to within 10%, and we (or someone else) convert it into a figure with 1% precision, then we're misrepresenting the source. E.g., if a distance is given as 1km, and we convert that to 0.62mi, then we're claiming a precision of 50ft instead of 500m. Or, sometimes the source itself will have spurious precision, because the journalist reporting on the topic has little understanding of stats. There have been edit wars over keeping undue precision inherited from a supposedly reliable source, and that has required consensus among editors who do know what they're doing to change it. — kwami (talk) 18:20, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Fayenatic. — kwami (talk) 16:11, 9 September 2018 (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:Winter Olympic venues by year

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 2018 OCT 7 CFD. Good Ol’factory (talk) 12:05, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Winter Olympic venues by year i.e. Category:2018 Winter Olympics venues to Category:2018 Winter Olympic venues, and back to 1924 i.e. Category:1924 Winter Olympics venues to Category:1924 Winter Olympic venues. Also all intermediate years (1928, 1932, 1936, 1948, 1952, 1956, 1960, 1964, 1968, 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1994, 1998, 2002, 2006, 2010; & 2014: all tagged).
Nominator's rationale: While only the 2022 category (Category:2022 Winter Olympic venues) uses "Olympic" rather than "Olympics"; all the Summer Olympics use "Olympic". Hence it seems preferable to change (e.g. to Category:2018 Winter Olympic venues etc.) so as to have the same format as for the Summer Olympics (see e.g. Category:2016 Summer Olympic venues). Hugo999 (talk) 10:57, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In which case why not just call it "Category:2016 Olympic venues" or "Category:Venues of the 2016 Summer Olympics" Rodney Baggins (talk) 05:43, 17 September 2018 (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