Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 July 13: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
moved swedish aircraft to July 14
Radiant! (talk | contribs)
Line 1: Line 1:
===July 13===
===July 13===
====[[:Category:U.S. aircraft manufacturers]]====
'''Rename''' to [[:Category:United States aircraft manufacturers]]. [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">&gt;|&lt;</font>]] 12:58, July 14, 2005 (UTC)


====[[:Category:Swedish aircraft manufacturers]]====

Just one article since it's creation almost a year ago; unneccessary without other articles. [[User:Variable|siafu]] 00:04, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
====[[:Category:Indian current events]]====
I believe it's redundant with [[:Category:Current events]] and also isn't being used much. - [[User:McCart42|McCart42]] [[User_talk:McCart42|(talk)]] 22:43, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Necessary for complete and accurate categorisation. [[User:CalJW|CalJW]] 09:26, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">&gt;|&lt;</font>]] 08:45, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as of [[User:CalJW|CalJW]] argument above. -- <font face="fixedsys">[[User:Johan Elisson|Elisson]]</font> &bull; <font face="fixedsys">[[User talk:Johan Elisson|Talk]]</font> 11:43, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. One article does not a category make. --[[User:Kbdank71|Kbdank71]] 12:56, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
*'''Weak delete''' per KBdank, but hope that a cross-referencing category system will be implemented some time this year. [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">&gt;|&lt;</font>]] 12:58, July 14, 2005 (UTC)


====[[:Category:Information Technology Asset Management]]====
====[[:Category:Information Technology Asset Management]]====

Revision as of 12:58, 14 July 2005

July 13

Category:U.S. aircraft manufacturers

Rename to Category:United States aircraft manufacturers. Radiant_>|< 12:58, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Swedish aircraft manufacturers

Just one article since it's creation almost a year ago; unneccessary without other articles. siafu 00:04, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Information Technology Asset Management

Badly formatted article masquerading as a category. --Tabor 21:17, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mountains of Wales

We already have Category:Mountains and hills of Wales. Do we need this one too? --Tabor 20:18, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Doctrines and teachings of Paul

"Doctrine" and "teaching" are basically the same thing. Category:Teachings of Paul will be adequate. 205.217.105.2 15:41, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ayyavazhi Related Topics and Category:Lists of Ayyavazhi Related Articles

Redundant with Lists of Ayyavazhi Related Articles. We do not generally have categories for something as broad as 'topics related to <foo>'. Subcategorizing may be useful, but this current version isn't. Radiant_>|< 10:03, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Heavily expanded articles/categories

Created from {{verylarge}}, its intent is to list those pages (and categories) that should be split and/or subcatted. That seems worthwhile but this title doesn't cover its content. Suggest renaming, to something like Category:Very large articles and categories. Radiant_>|< 07:55, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Protected articles

Category:Protected already exists. -- Beland 04:13, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • ...and can also apply to things that aren't articles, e.g. the copyvio policy. Merge & delete. Radiant_>|< 07:24, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Movie genres

Rename to Category:Film genres. -Sean Curtin 00:41, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Military bases in Kansas

(added by Choster 00:55, 13 July 2005 (UTC) entry notes listed on Category:Military bases in North Carolina)[reply]

Category:Military bases in North Carolina

I propose these be changed to Category:Military facilities in Kansas and Category:Military facilities in North Carolina. Wikipedia apparently draws a distinction between, e.g. Category:Military facilities of the United States and Category:United States military bases or between Category:United States Army facilities and Category:Bases of the U.S. Army. Let us leave aside for the moment the overlap with Category:United States Army bases. "Facilities" is both more inclusive and more accurate, as the categories include articles about installations which fall outside the bureaucratic designation of "base," and future categories of this type are likely to be populated at the hands of non-experts. The new nomenclature is still well-understood by the public, but would invite less ambiguity. - choster 00:55, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually, that would need a separate CfD. I won't do that right now in case something turns up in this debate of relevance. Someone remind me later... -Splash 01:05, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rugby stubs Category:Rugby related lists Category:Rugby teams

These contain a grand total of no articles and not surprising. There are two different sports named 'rugby' union and league so all these categories do is hold sub-categories e.g. Category:Rugby league teams and Category:Rugby union teams. It doesn't take any more clicks to go Category:Rugby => Category:Rugby league => Category:Rugby league teams.GordyB 20:16, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]