Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 November 16: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 04:51, 18 November 2007

< November 15	November 17 >

November 16

Category:Six Flags parks and attractions

Suggest merging Category:Six Flags parks and attractions to Category:Six Flags

Nominator's rationale: Merge. No reason for this extra level. All of the roller coasters are being moved into a specific sub category. What's left here and in the parent are so few that we don't need two categories. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:03, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Heritage Canada

Propose renaming Category:Heritage Canada to Category:Canadian Heritage

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Heritage Canada and Canadian Heritage are, confusingly, two different things. The Heritage Canada article is about a non-governmental charitable foundation. The cultural department whose agencies are being categorized is in fact called Department of Canadian Heritage. So Category:Canadian Heritage would be more accurate.-- Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Department of Canadian Heritage, to match main article. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would be fine by me, too. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:36, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Screenshots of The Big O

Category:Screenshots of The Big O to Category:The Big O media

More inclusive name. This way, everything from screen shots, covers and artwork from the series can be categorized.Nohansen 00:08, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Though I agree with that idea, it isn't a speediable change, so should be in the main list. Grutness...wha? 00:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Moved from speedy.---- Mike Selinker (talk) 21:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:The Big O images - "Media" is an ambiguous name, as it could mean books or magazines written about the series. In line with Category:Television images (whose subcat, Category:Screenshots of television, could do with some standardization). Otto4711 (talk) 15:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian councillors

More inclusive name for the categories. The ultimate reason why this is necessary is revealed by the fact that a capital C is the only thing currently distinguishing the category for city councillors in the province of Quebec from the category for city councillors in Quebec City. Bearcat 11:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As above, though I agree with that idea, it isn't a speediable change, so should be in the main list. Grutness...wha? 00:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason it's even getting listed anywhere is that I haven't been able to boot into my Windows partition for about six weeks now, so I can't do an AWB run by myself. It'd have been done over a month ago if I could have. Try as I might, I just can't make myself see it as a change that requires any kind of debate. Bearcat 09:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there probably won't be any objection to it, but it's not covered by any of the types of change which can be speedied (as listed above) - it is possible that someone would be able to think of a reason to keep city and town categories separate. Grutness...wha? 22:42, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from speedy.---- Mike Selinker (talk) 21:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support rename per nom. (The double-l spelling of "councillor" is correct in Canadian spelling and should be retained.) Snocrates (talk) 02:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Journalism academics

Propose renaming Category:Journalism academics to Category:Journalism scholars

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Like legal scholars, many journalism scholars are not in the academy, or only teach as adjuncts. Of the 10 scholars in the category, about half are not tenure-track academics, but either adjuncted or had administrative positions at journalism "centers" at universities. They are certainly "journalism scholars" and there is no reason to distinguish between the full-time tenure-track academics and those who have done scholarship through other types of positions. ---- Lquilter (talk) 21:12, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to the more grammatical form Category:Scholars of journalism, as used by many scholar categories. Johnbod (talk) 00:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only found two "scholars of" formulas: Scholars of Marxism and Scholars of antisemitism. I'm not sure the more explicit formulation is needed here -- "Journalism scholars" seems pretty clear -- but I don't object if consensus goes that way. --Lquilter (talk) 04:29, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are a variety of formulae: Category:Talmudists, Category:Scholars of Marxism, Category:Biblical scholars and some rather ambiguous ones - Category:Feminist scholars is I suppose not "Scholars of Feminism", nor Category:Middle East scholars (only 2 members) only for people from the Middle east. It's not about clarity, but grammar. Category:International relations scholars and Category:African American studies scholars are I think the only "non-proper noun+scholar" combos at present, & they should be changed too, to "Scholars of...". Johnbod (talk) 04:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree on the latter two categories you mention, but not on the reason1 The only reason we ought to care about the grammar in this instance I think is only to aid clarity. (Intl relations scholars is not actually that confusing but it's funny....) -- Lquilter

Category:Spoiler warning templates

Category:Spoiler warning templates - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Only one item in the category which is currently up for deletion as well. -- Axem Titanium (talk) 21:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Colossus class battleships

Propose renaming Category:Colossus class battleships to Category:Colossus class battleships (1910)

Nominator's rationale: There were two Colossus classes: one in 1910 and one in 1882. There is already a Category:Colossus class battleships (1882); this one needs to be renamed to make the difference between the two clear. This is a common type of rename, and there are several examples of identically named class categories disambiguated by year in use already. -- TomTheHand (talk) 18:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- 132.205.99.122 (talk) 19:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per very clear nom. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)
Rename for clarity Travtim^(Talk) 20:31, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
RenameShouldn't be an issue.-- Balloonman (talk) 20:45, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interchanges

Category:Interchanges - Template:Lc1

Category:Interchanges of Japan - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Empty categories. Sushiya 15:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as empty. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:05, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. -- Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as empty Travtim^(Talk) 20:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amphibious assault ships -> Amphibious warfare vessels

Suggest merging Category:Amphibious assault ships to Category:Amphibious warfare vessels

Suggest renaming:

Nominator's rationale: The purpose of this merge is to standardize naming of categories for amphibious warfare vessels, which are kind of a mess now. The change from "amphibious assault" to "amphibious warfare" is because "amphibious assault ship" is a fairly specific term, and does not reflect how the categories are actually used. They are being used to categorize a variety of ships involved in amphibious warfare. The change from "ships" to "vessels" is intended to allow the categories to be used for vessels that aren't really ships. TomTheHand 15:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support Note that nominator proposed these changes at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships#Amphibious assault ships vs. amphibious warfare vessels where there was no real resistance. Maralia 15:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Gatoclass 15:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I see no reason why these changes would not be beneficial.-MBK004 16:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Steamboat Companies in Pacific Northwest

Suggest merging Category:Steamboat Companies in Pacific Northwest to Category:UNKNOWN

Nominator's rationale:: Merge this overly-narrow, orphaned category to somewhere, but I don't know where. Any ideas? (all three companies were based in Oregon). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS That's the end of today's orphaned categories. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Double merge to Category:Transportation companies of the United States and Category:Companies based in Oregon. Bencherlite^Talk 15:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment that sounds good to me. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:18, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Steamboats in Pacific Northwest

Suggest merging Category:Steamboats in Pacific Northwest to Category:UNKNOWN

Nominator's rationale: Merge this overly-narrow orphaned category to somewhere, but I don't know where. Category:Paddle steamers isn't quite accurate, and Category: Steamships seems too broad. Any ideas? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Steamships as that's full of individual articles about steamboats / steamships. If somebody wants to create "Steamships by country" structure (or whatever the appropriate preposition is ("by", "of" or "from", I can never remember the conventions...)), fine; until then, the head category is probably sufficient. Bencherlite ^Talk 15:13, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a nonstandard category name on several counts. Both articles in the category are, in fact, paddle steamers. Both belong in Category:Paddle steamers and Category:Passenger ships of the United States, which I will take care of now. Maralia 15:58, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment that sounds good to me. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Maralia's analysis is better than my previous attempt and, now that the articles are appropriately categorised, this category is redundant. Category:Paddle steamers is a sub-cat of Category:Steamships and is more appropriate, looking at the article as a whole - I was misled by the first description in the articles being effectively "it's a steamboat", rather than "it's a paddle steamer"... Bencherlite ^Talk 17:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Gangs in the United States of America

Rename to Category:Gangs in the United States, to match United States. -- Prove It ^(talk) 14:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. -- Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Rename instead United States -> United States of America -- 132.205.99.122 (talk) 19:11, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Propaganda phrases

Category:Propaganda phrases - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: ~~Delete~~, vague and largely POV category. One woman's factual-description of the truth-as-she-sees-it is another's propaganda, and vice-versa. See also Category talk: Propaganda phrases. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. -- Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete easily POV motivated Travtim^(Talk) 20:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Political slogans, after removing a few (eg Home taping is killing music) Johnbod (talk) 03:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Category:Political slogans per Johnbod. A much better solution. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:49, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Safety Engineering

Suggest merging Category:Safety Engineering to Category:Safety engineering

Nominator's rationale: Merge as duplicate, possible speedy (capitalisation error). BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:13, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, speedy probably. -- Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy merge Johnbod (talk) 03:34, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Controversies involving tasers

Propose renaming Category:Controversies involving tasers to Category:Electroshock weapon controversies

Nominator's rationale: Rename to match head article Electroshock weapon controversy. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename. I found this category via Special:Uncategorizedcategories, and cat sorted it. I agree with the nominator's rationale that Category:Electroshock weapon controversies is more appropriate. - Mtmelendez ^(Talk) 13:13, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename. Created the category was unsure if I shouldve used tasers or electroshock weapons. Kuzwa 14:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- just for future reference, the general principle in naming categories is follow the title of the main article. There are some situations where that doesn't work, but not many, and if there is a main aricle, it's usually best to follow that. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:09, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. -- Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom Travtim^(Talk) 20:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Old Forres Sandle Manor Students

Category:Old Forres Sandle Manor Students - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete single-article category rescued from the orphanage,possible hoax. There is no article on the school, and the sole article in the category is Olly Morgan, which not only fails to mention the school, but lists him in the infobox as having attended Millfield School. Neither of the two profiles of him linked from the article mentions Old Forres Sandle Manor, although the school does appear to exist: see http://www.forressandlemanor.com --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:02, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - although Google shows no link, it may not be a hoax as the school appears to be a prep school (i.e. education to age 13). Delete because Wikipedia doesn't categorize people by educational establishment at that age. I have readded Category:Old Millfieldians to Olly Morgan's article as multiple sources indicate that he went there (see google search). Bencherlite ^Talk 13:41, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It doesn't make much sense to keep such a category when there's not even an article for the school itself. We may want it someday, but then it should be named to match the format of Category:People by school in England. -- Prove It ^(talk) 14:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jesuit colleges in India

Suggest merging Category:Jesuit colleges in India to Category:Jesuit schools in India

Nominator's rationale: Merge as duplicate. All these institutions appear to be schools, it's just that some of them are called "foo College", a common naming convention for Jesuit schools. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom; "College" in India can be used in the sense of High School in the US or UK. -- Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Religious organizations which tolerate polygamy

Category:Religious organizations which tolerate polygamy - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: This category is empty except for the subcategory Category:Mormon fundamentalism, which has (some of) the same parent categories as this one. Suggest deleting until needed. Alternatively, can it be populated with anything? Snocrates 11:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not needed, and we don't need to start religion by tenet categories: Category:Religious organziations that forbid consumption of pork, Category:Religious organizations that forbid working on the Sabbath, Category:Religious organizations that require circumcision, Category:Religious organizations that tolerate cremation of the dead, etc.... it gets us nowhere fast. -- Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Sulk. I was really hoping that if this one stayed, I could have created Category:Religions which would require me to believe six impossible things before breakfast. It would have been well-populated. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unnecessary categorisation Travtim^(Talk) 20:41, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm pretty sure we had a very similar set of categories about 10 months ago. Either or both non-defining attribute or POV about what is a defining attribute. (And don't get my started on use of the word "tolerate".) ---- Lquilter (talk) 20:56, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Crime in fiction

Suggest merging Category:Crime in fiction to Category:Crime fiction

Nominator's rationale: Merge, This category only contains Category:Crime fiction . --Eliyak T·C 11:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete while a nuanced distinction could be drawn, there is no apparent attempt to do so, and it probably wouldn't be keepable as many non-"crime fiction" fictional books have some crime happening in them: much of Mark Twain's output and the whole genre of mysteries could be shoehorned into that. -- Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and populate Crime occurs in fiction which is not crime fiction. Quite a few crimes form the basis of non-crime fiction stories, where the consequences of the crime (such as war) is the focus. -- 132.205.99.122 (talk) 19:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Members of Associazione Culturale Nove

Category:Members of Associazione Culturale Nove - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Single-article orphaned category. The lone article Jerry Ross (painter) doesn't mention the Associazione Culturale Nove, and there is no article Associazione Culturale Nove. If such an article is written, it's members could be listed in the article. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Gator Olympians

Category:Gator Olympians - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete. I'm not entirely sure what this category is intended for, but my best guess so far is that it is intended to include athletes from the Florida Gators who later participate in the olympics. This seems to me to be a vary narrow intersection, with limited possibility for growth (and great potential for category clutter if replicated for other sports clubs); the 5 athletes concerned should be listed in the article Florida Gators . --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete we don't need to sub categorize people by school+olympic participation. -- Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to nuke this now. It was created by a sock of the indef blocked user WOverstreet. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Sheldon

Suggest merging Category:People from Sheldon to Category:People from Birmingham, England

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge, overly narrow division of Category:People from Birmingham, England, with limited potential for growth. Council wards are too small a unit to subdivide the population of English cities; Birmingham has 40 council wards, an creating a category for each of them would merely divide a category of useable size into 40 undersized categories. Additionally, council wards are not stable units, being subject to periodic review by the Boundary Committee for England. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:27, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The area has been inhabited since before theDomesday Book - it may be a council ward now but it will not disappear if boundaries are changed. The category member Increase Nowell is simply not from Birmingham - Sheldon had no link to the city in 1590. Any wider geographical category will be inaccurate (either currently or historically).Aatomic1 11:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply the same applies to countless other small geographical divisions of England, and of many other countries. Unless we are going to create thousands of tiny categories of people-by-place-in-England, we have to accept some imprecision. One possible solution is to also categorise the people by whatever county they would have been before the city boundaries were extended to include Sheldon. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Sheldon is bigger than thousands of the categories of people-by-place-in-England that already exist Category:People from London by district;Category:People by city or town in England;Category:People from Greater Manchester. Aatomic1 13:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categories exist to aid navigation. Do we really want to start splitting the 390 articles in Category:People from Birmingham, England into 40 subdivisions (one per ward), with an average of 9 articles in each? Categories exist to assist reader navigation, and that only impedes navigation. People move around within cities, so many biographical articles would be categorised under more than one subdivision of Brum, creating category clutter. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:18, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are using the Wikipedia collective we then the answer is yes we do.Category:People by county in New York. Aatomic1 16:03, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bad comparison. Birmingham has a population of 1 million in 100 square miles, but New York state has 19 million people over 54,000 square miles. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Particle in a box

Suggest merging Category:Particle in a box to Category:Quantum models

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge two-article category with little scope for expansion. (rescued from the orphanage). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge inclusion in the larger category is sufficient, cannot be expected to become populated as a separate category Travtim^(Talk) 20:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Theorem provers

Propose renaming Category:Theorem provers to Category:Theorem proving software

Nominator's rationale: Most categories used for software have either "software" or "(software)" as part of the name. Thus quickly identified in lists of subcategories and supporting "Category:software" searches. tooold 08:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support That is clearly the case Travtim^(Talk) 20:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just noticed - the main article is Automated theorem proving thus a better rename would be to "Automated theorem proving software". tooold (talk) 23:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Question aren't the words "automated" and "software" largely redundant? Not all software is automated, but I don't see how theorem proving can be automated without software. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"I have some Automated Theorem Proving software". "I have some Automated Theorem Proving". The 2nd sentence doesn't work. So "software" is not redundant in the sense of being an understood meaning when omitted. tooold (talk) 16:22, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly instead of "better", I should have said "consistent with the naming convention of adding "software" to the article name. 69.106.226.205 (talk) 04:51, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Orlando Florida

Suggest merging Category:People from Orlando Florida to Category:People from Orlando, Florida

Nominator's rationale: Merge as duplicate, possible speedy. (I found this one in the orphanage). BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy merge as typographical error. Bencherlite ^Talk 11:36, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. -- Prove It ^(talk) 13:56, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. -- Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom, probably speedy Travtim^(Talk) 20:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Subcategories of Category:Political parties in Indian states

Propose renaming All subcats of Category:Political parties in Indian states.

Nominator's rationale: I'm proposing all subcategories of this be renamed to more normal titles; for example, I think Category:Indian political parties-Sikkim should become Category:Political parties of Sikkim, or something similar. The current names, with these dashes, are unnecessarily awkward. Picaroon (t) 02:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I do think it worth keeping the fact that these are federal states in India, not countries, in the titles. Johnbod (talk) 03:37, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category: Runestones, Skåne

Propose merging: Category:Runestones, Skåne into Category:Runestones in Scania

Nominator's rationale: The main entry is Scania. Two duplicating categories exist for the same articles: "Runestones in Scania"/"Runestones, Skåne". Following the decision in another renaming discussion,[1] where it was decided that the name should be in the format "Runestones in Scania", I suggest a merger of "Runestones, Skåne" into that category, rather than the other way around. The articles in this newly created and newly populated category were moved here by depopluating Category:Runestones in Scania. Pia 02:13, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support per above.--Berig 16:31, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom; this was already resolved before. -- Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:58, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as duplicate Travtim^(Talk) 20:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Zenit football managers

Propose renaming Category:Zenit football managers to Category:FC Zenit Saint Petersburg managers

Nominator's rationale: Rename to match the team's article name and the format of Category:FC Zenit Saint Petersburg players. Carlossuarez46 01:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom to match the main article FC Zenit Saint Petersburg. Bencherlite ^Talk 11:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Web mashups

Category:Web mashups - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete one item category, that could probably contain more as the definition of the term in our article is sufficiently loosey-goosey that nearly all web applications may qualify so ultimately not-defining. Carlossuarez46 01:41, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:U.S. Route 36

Category:U.S. Route 36 - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete two article category for a road, not much room for expansion. Carlossuarez46 01:12, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Travtim^(Talk) 20:53, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The Gazette

Category:The Gazette - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete eponymous category for a band per multiple precedents. Carlossuarez46 01:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and multiple previous instances. (There was a song floating around in this category, which I moved to Category:The Gazette songs). Bencherlite ^Talk 12:15, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete overly generic. What about the many newspapers called "The Gazette" which would more usually appropriate this category. -- 132.205.99.122 (talk) 19:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of Desperate Housewives characters

Category:Lists of Desperate Housewives characters - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete: Only one member, due to deletion of all other members. CrazyLegsKC 01:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Desperate Housewives characters. Otto4711 03:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to category:Desperate Housewives characters and Category:Lists of fictional characters by work so that the list can still be found through both of its parent categories. Bencherlite ^Talk 12:11, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Interstate 72

Category:Interstate 72 - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Delete one-item category for a 300km stretch of road, not much room for expansion of either the road or the category. Carlossuarez46 01:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mostly per nom. (The road could be expanded coast-to-coast, but until it is the category ain't needed).</pedant> --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Travtim^(Talk) 20:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 186: / Line 186: @@
 **'''Question''' aren't the words "automated" and "software" largely redundant?  Not all software is automated, but I don't see how theorem proving can be automated without software. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|BrownHairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 15:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 :::"I have some Automated Theorem Proving software". "I have some Automated Theorem Proving". The 2nd sentence doesn't work. So "software" is not redundant in the sense of being an understood meaning when omitted. [[User:Rwwww|tooold]] ([[User talk:Rwwww|talk]]) 16:22, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
+:::Possibly instead of "better", I should have said "consistent with the naming convention of adding "software" to the article name. [[Special:Contributions/69.106.226.205|69.106.226.205]] ([[User talk:69.106.226.205|talk]]) 04:51, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
 ==== Category:People from Orlando Florida ====