Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/User/Archive/December 2008

< November 2008	January 2009 >

Note: if the discussion that you are looking for is from this month, but is not on this page, it may still be at WP:UCFD.

December 21

Category:Wikipedist Wikipedians

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. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 22:29, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"A Wikipedist is a Wikipedian who is also an Encyclopedist, and of the opinion that Wikipedia should emulate the spirit of the Encyclopédie rather than that of Usenet." - Categories like these have mostly stuck around because, like Category:Eventualist Wikipedians, there are meta pages describing the philosophy, legitimizing it to a point. This category, however, has no such meta page. If kept, there would be nothing to distinguish this from any other philosopy someone could make up that doesn't have a meta page, leaving infinite possibilities open for similar categories. Why not a philosophy for Wikipedians who think Wikipedia should include more articles of x type? Why not a philosophy for wikipedians who feel it should be used in y way? I'm not a huge fan of any of the "philosophy" categories, but I think fringe ones like this can be deleted. There is nothing a category does for this that a userbox wouldn't be equally qualified for. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (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:Wikipedians in Keswick, Ontario

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedians by small location" category, which have all been deleted. "Keswick is the largest urban community within the Town of Georgina making up nearly half of Georgina's population of 43,800 with its current population around 21,000". Even a category for Georgina itself would be below the population threshold for which we want to categorize. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If deleted upmerge to Category:Wikipedians in Ontario. --Know zilla 16:00, 31 December 2008 (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:Wikipedians in Whitchurch-Stouffville

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. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 22:29, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedians by small location" category, which have all been deleted. Population of less than 25,000. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (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:Wikipedians in Thames Ditton

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. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 22:29, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedians by small location" category, which have all been deleted. Population of less than 6,000. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (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:Wikipedians who like Speedway

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This category is for those who "like" the sport of Motorcycle speedway. The "who like" naming convention has been abanoned everywhere except in the "Wikipedians by TV show" category tree. Additionally, the category should match the article name, and I see no reason to capitalize "speedway", so this needs to be changed to Category:Wikipedians interested in motorcycle speedway. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename as nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Needs to be standardized. Icewedge (talk) 15:21, 30 December 2008 (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:Wikipedians who like the Zoids franchise

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "who like" naming convention has been abanoned everywhere except in the "Wikipedians by TV show" category tree. Now, there actually is a Zoids anime series, so in that case it would be valid use, but this category is about the entire franchise, not just the anime TV series. The article title is at Zoids, not Zoids (franchise), so I'm not sure about that part either. I do agree that a category to encompass the entire franchise is better than a bunch of smaller categories (which run the risk of being too narrow for collaboration), so perhaps that part of the name should be kept as is, although I'm open to suggestions. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Wikipedians interested in the Zoids franchise as nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per VegaDark. Icewedge (talk) 02:58, 13 January 2009 (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:Wikipedians interested in a region

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should be renamed to better clarify this is a parent category. The lone user needs to be depopulated from this as well. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Wikipedians by interest in a region as nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have depopulated all pages from the category, so rename per nom.. Icewedge (talk) 15:34, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per VegaDark and Icewedge. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^T ^C 20:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Rename per nomination. —MarsJenkar (talk | contribs) 22:50, 7 January 2009 (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:Wikipedians who watch sports

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The contents of this category either need to be upmerged to Category:Wikipedians by interest in a sport, or this category needs some sort of rename. Wikipedians who merely "watch" sports is far too inclusive for a category, plus the subcategories merely indicate being a "fan" of something, not necessarily watching it (blind people, anyone?), so the category name isn't necessarily accurate for its subcategories. Not sure about what a good rename would be, however. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge as nom, or rename to something consensus determines if no consensus to merge. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/merge functionally identical. Icewedge (talk) 15:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or upmerge. --Know zilla 15:55, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^T ^C 20:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

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.

IRC client categories

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it really necessary to differentiate users of different IRC clients by way of categories? I think the main category is sufficient. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge both to Category:Wikipedians who use IRC as nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: aren't those categories just like Category:Wikipedians who use Mozilla Firefox etc.? I suppose they're there because the users may have more knowledge about the specific software, and thus more ability to contribute to the respective articles than others, but if these categories are debated then why wouldn't the use by browser ones be as well? -- Mentisock 14:57, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm pretty sure the logic of keeping the browser categories isn't that the users in them could help contribute to pages on that browser. If that was the case, they would all be deleted as too narrow for collaboration. I think the logic behind keeping those is more related to determining browser preferences in development of Wikipedia tools, or something else along those lines, although I personally am not convinced we should keep the browser categories either. VegaDark (talk) 10:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge both to Category:Wikipedians who use IRC per nom. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^T ^C 20:29, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

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.

December 20

Category:Funny

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. No foreseeable benefit for collaboration; misnamed. Icewedge (talk) 15:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unsure what the creator of this category intended, but it does not seem to be contributing to the creation of the encyclopedia. - Stepheng3 (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not really funny... and clearly redundantly useless. -- Menti sock 14:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Underpopulated, redundant, and misleading, since the userpage it links to really isn't funny. —MarsJenkar (talk | contribs) 21:41, 29 December 2008 (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.

December 17

Category:Wikipedians who Canoe

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. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 07:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if the name of this is proper. The article on Canoe is about the boat itself, it directs readers to go to Canoeing for the activity. On my quick once-over of the article I didn't see "Canoe" being used as anything but the boat itself. Additionally, I question the capitalization of "Canoe" in this. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Wikipedians interested in canoeing as nom, or delete if consensus deems that name is to attenuated from the original category. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak delete~~ Comment. At the moment there's only one person in the category. Also, I don't really see much potential for collaboration, unless there were a lot more people in the category, and I'm not even sure about that. —MarsJenkar (talk | contribs) 19:40, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - comparable to "Wikipedians who ride bicycles". And with a simpler learning curve. Can you hold a paddle? Dip it in the water? and push? (repeat.) Or perhaps if you've a generous (or gullible) friend, then all you need do is merely sit in a canoe... A potentially all-inclusive category. - jc37 09:04, 27 January 2009 (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.

"Wikipedians who collect" categories

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 all. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I used to collect lots of things, and you know what? I may very well have been more able or willing to collaborate on articles about such topics because of my collecting. However, categorizing those who "collect" as opposed to a general interest category is bad practice, because it leaves out potential collaborators of those who are interested in a subject yet don't actually collect. If renamed, none of these would have that issue. A category titled "Wikipedians who collect model cars" has no encyclopedic advantage over a category titled "Wikipedians interested in model cars", for instance. The latter is more inclusive, and there would be no encyclopedic benefit of having both categories. I'm also not sure about the capitalized "S" in scouting, should that be lowercase? VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename all as nom. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rename all, Scouting in the context of a youth education movement is a proper noun, as opposed to military, sports or other scouting. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 21:00, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rename all as nom. --Bduke (Discussion) 09:26, 30 December 2008 (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:American expatriate Wikipedians

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. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 04:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does knowing who is an expatriate or not benefit the encyclopedia in any way? I can't think of how it would. This is the only expatriate category of its kind. Not likely to be used to seek out others for collaborative purposes. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (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:American Indian and Alaska Native Wikipedians

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: upmerge. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

American Indian and Alaska Native? Huh? The category description contradicts this, saying "American Indian or Alaska Native". Either way, I don't see why these have to be grouped. They can have their own individual categories if necessary. (Category:Native American Wikipedians already exists). Additionally, single user category. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge to Category:Native American Wikipedians as nom. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (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:Ashkenazic and Yiddish Wikipedians

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. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 04:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ashkenazic and Yiddish? Do these need to be grouped in one category? The description and related userbox simply says "This user is of German and Jewish descent." If that is all this is grouping, then this sounds strikingly similar to the "Wikipedians by ancestry" categories that have been deleted, as well as the "dual nationality/ethinicity" categories which have been either deleted or double upmerged. See here. If deleted, the subcategory needs to be moved somewhere. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom, or at least split or upmerge in some fashion. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (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:Lucknow Wikipedians

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 Category:Lucknow Wikipedians to Category:Wikipedians in Lucknow - jc37 08:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Needs a rename to conform with "Wikipedians by location" categories. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Wikipedians in Lucknow as nom. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (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:Wikipedians in Ålesund

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. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 04:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedians by small location" category. Population of 45,000, which is below the threshold we want to have location categories for. See precedent here. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (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.

December 14

Category:Free use license

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 per Derek Andrews. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:29, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from CfD. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:01, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Free use license to Category:Wikipedians who have licensed their contributions under a Free use license

Nominator's rationale: As it stands one would expect these categories to contain articles related to Free Use Licences. The names do not suggest that these are categories designed for administration of the project. ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 07:10, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the current title is confusing, but the proposed one is rather verbose (and does not escape the difficult issue of American and British English spelling differences). While I'm not sure what the ideal format would be, we might consider something shorter like what accompanies other "serious" userboxes e.g. Category:User en, Category:User php, etc. That said, this nomination may actually belong at WP:UCFD (so please copy my comment if it is moved there). — CharlotteWebb 14:55, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support proposed renames; these are Wikipedia-related categories, and should have names that reflect that. Terraxos (talk) 16:57, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: for the sake of consistency, I suggest following the convention used in Category:Public domain licensing Wikipedians, and renaming as:

Category:Free use licensing Wikipedians

Category:Wikipedians with free use text contributions

Category:Wikipedians with free use text contributions (minor edits only) Derek Andrews (talk) 11:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New discussion

I agree with Derek Andrews' rename proposal. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (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.

December 8

Category:Wikipedians who play Japan exclusive video games

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. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 22:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The very last category we have on Wikipedia with the "who play" naming convention. There's a reason for this, which is that categorizing "who plays" certain sports/games is an unencyclopedic thing to categorize, as playing something does not necessarily indicate an encyclopedic interest in improving the article relating to the sport/game in question. This category is no different. This apparently was restored after the original mass nomination that resulted in deleting the entire "Wikipedians by video game" category tree, see here. However, I don't find the reasoning in that compelling. Yes, "Japan exclusive" is probably broad enough to support collaboration, but we still have the "who play" problem. At minimum this need to be renamed to Category:Wikipedians interested in Japan exclusive video games, but my first preference is to delete. VegaDark (talk) 17:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom, rename if no consensus to delete. VegaDark (talk) 17:36, 8 December 2008 (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:Wikipedians who understand Leet

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. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 22:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does not benefit the encyclopedia to categorize such users. Can this be considered a substantially similar recreation of these categories? If so, speedy delete. VegaDark (talk) 17:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/speedy delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 17:36, 8 December 2008 (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:Wikipedians who like Jean-Luc Godard films

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Needs to be renamed to Category:Wikipedians interested in Jean-Luc Godard films per naming conventions at Category:Wikipedians by interest in a film director. VegaDark (talk) 17:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename as nom. VegaDark (talk) 17:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom, WP:NC and Category:Wikipedians by interest in a film director. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^T ^C 20:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

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:Vandalism Control Network members

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No indication this is a user category, so needs a rename at minimum. Also wouldn't oppose deletion based on the fact that this is near identical to Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit, except isn't actually a Wikiproject.VegaDark (talk) 23:20, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Wikipedians in the Vandalism Control Network or delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 23:20, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, VegaDark (talk) 17:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^T ^C 20:29, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

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:WikiProject Los Angeles members

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicative of Category:WikiProject Los Angeles participants. VegaDark (talk) 22:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as nom, would slightly prefer participants over members. VegaDark (talk) 22:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, VegaDark (talk) 17:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^T ^C 20:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

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:Chinese Canadian Wikipedians

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. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 22:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnicity/nationality combination category which has a precedent (see here) to either delete or double upmerge (In this case to Category:Chinese Wikipedians and Category:Canadian Wikipedians. VegaDark (talk) 22:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or double upmerge as nom. VegaDark (talk) 22:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, VegaDark (talk) 17:36, 8 December 2008 (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.

December 4

Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Mater Dei High School

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedians by high school" category, which have an extensive history of deletion. Speedy delete. VegaDark (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Icewedge (talk) 15:19, 30 December 2008 (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:Wikipedians who like Ciara

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:54, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedians by individual" and/or "Wikipedians by band/artist" category, all of which have been deleted. VegaDark (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per nom. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^T ^C 20:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

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:Rudy Giuliani Presidential Campaign Supporters

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. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedians by support/oppose" category, which have all beed deleted. Additionally, no indication it is a user category, and improper capitalization. VegaDark (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete soapboxing category. Icewedge (talk) 23:29, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. —MarsJenkar (talk | contribs) 19:45, 6 January 2009 (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:Wikipedians in Warminster

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. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 04:27, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedians by small location" category, which have all beed deleted. Additionally no indication if it is this one or this one, either way the population is below 50,000. VegaDark (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the link in the userbox generating the category leads to Warminster Township, Pennsylvania. Icewedge (talk) 23:32, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2008 (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.