The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Miss Hong Kong prize winners to Category:Miss Hong Kong award winners

Nominator's rationale: The category should be renamed to "award winners" instead of "prize winners" as it includes delegates who just special award winners as well, not just the top 3 "prize" winners. smileydude66 (talk) 23:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - if I'm understanding the purpose of the category, it is not for women who are named "Miss Hong Kong" within any pageant structure such as Miss World or Miss Universe but is instead for any competitor in the Miss Hong Kong Pageant who wins any prize or award through that pageant. It would be like having a category for the winners of "Miss Congeniality" or "Miss Photogenic" from the Miss USA pageant. Otto4711 (talk) 23:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Otto. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nintendo Setting articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category is empty due to article consolidation. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I created this category a long time ago hoping that others would fill it. It goes along with the other ones in Category:Nintendo articles by type. This one was intended for fictional Nintendo settings (such as Hyrule). I just thought it would be easier having the articles sorted by type. If it isn't working out I have no problem with it being deleted, but if someone wanted to help out with filling it, it could be useful. –bse3 (talk • contribs • count • logs) 01:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was merge Category:Thor to Category:Marvel Comics Asgardians. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:46, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Thor (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Delete-Nominator's rationale: This cat is parented by Category:Marvel Comics Asgardians which is more encompassing; however, the bulk of characters are duel eligible. There is no need to sub cat these characters at the expense of the parent cat, in addition there no need for redundancy. -66.109.248.114 (talk) 21:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

• Merge to Category:Marvel Comics Asgardians. No need to subcat these out. Otto4711 (talk) 01:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge this wouldn't be the proper title for the comic book Thor. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I would recommend outright deletion over merge, as all the characters in the Thor cat are already listed in the Asgardian cat. -66.109.248.114 (talk) 23:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:48, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rival Schools characters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: One character category per article consolidation. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not needed. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename to Category:Hip hop fashion. As long as the article redirects to hip hop fashion, the category should be named that. If an article on urban fashion is written that shows significant differences, this can be reconsidered.--Mike Selinker (talk) 01:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Urban fashion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Marketing term w/o clear definition, highly dependent on region and a time. As more than half of population on the planet lives in urban areas it may be hard to identify what will not eventually end up in this category. Created by a new user enriching Wikipedia with ad-like articles about fashion brands. Urban fashion was originally redirect to Hip hop fashion, now it points to the category. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 21:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Seems potentially duplicative of hip hop fashion. I would just leave that one personally unless someone can explain the criteria that differentiate the two. By the way, the articles this new user is adding are good and of brands/concepts that are or appear notable in urban/hip-hop fashion. I'm surprised we didn't have an article about (for example) all over print already. 68.160.5.32 (talk) 04:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Urban fashion is subjective and changes over time. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge or Rename Merge to Category:Hip hop fashion or Category:2000s fashion or rename to Street fashion or Streetwear or "Contemporary streetwear". Several of these have no other cats & should not be orphaned. Johnbod (talk) 22:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. The objections to the vagueness of the term urban fashion are well taken. However, the term is commonly used as a self-description among people who are familiar with it, and is somewhat synonymous with streetwear. I chose to create urban fashion because it is the most general descriptor, in my opinion somewhat more inclusive than streetwear. I think an article entitled urban fashion, or contemporary urban fashion, needs to be written and hip hop fashion should be subsumed underneath that moniker. This is because hip hop fashion is quite clearly a part of a larger movement that includes significant contributions from other areas (such as Japanese bricolage design) that don't necessarily identify with hip hop culture. To respond to the above deletion comment, urban fashion, like all areas of fashion, obviously changes over time but also has a clear continuity, and anyone who spends even a cursory amount of time researching the topic (Format Magazine, Sneaker Freaker) will see it that it is an international and unitary design culture. Munificentdesign (talk) 23:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Phantasy Star characters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Empty category. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was merge into Category:Quest for Glory and Category:Lists of video game characters. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Quest for Glory characters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: One article in whole category. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge to Category:Quest for Glory and Category:Lists of video game characters. Otto4711 (talk) 01:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Kirby characters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Empty category, subcategory also empty due to article consolidation. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - although the category is not empty, the one article in it is well-enough categorized without this category. Otto4711 (talk) 01:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. TTN (talk) 23:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Farscape planets (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Empty category. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Futurama planets (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category now empty per article consolidation. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nightmare Enterprises monsters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category now empty Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. TTN (talk) 23:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Charismatic religious leaders (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Renominating because previous nominator did not tag the category. Previous nominator had nominated saying "isn't this POV?" Lquilter (talk) 18:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• delete - Isn't this POV? - Yes, it is. I had assumed that this would be an unfortunately ambiguous title for leaders in the Charismatic movement, but, no; this is "religious leaders who have charismatic power" or something like that. (The definition on the category describes it as, This category contains religious leaders whose main basis of authority was or is based on charismatic authority, following Max Weber's classification of authority.) So it should be deleted, or completely redefined and renamed unambiguously to be Category:Leaders in the charismatic religious movement. --Lquilter (talk) 22:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC) (reposted from prior deletion discussion; notices to previous discussants posted)[reply]
• Delete mostly matches the religion section of List of charismatic leaders as defined by Max Weber's classification of authority, which might be acceptable for a list - maybe- but certainly isn't for a category, especially without the explanation in the name. repeating my previous comment. I think bencherlite was correct not to delete an untagged category btw. Johnbod (talk) 19:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Lquilter. Category would be useful if it did classify leaders of the "charismatic movement", but the current definition is POV and very subjective. Snocrates 21:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Almost certainly it would get misused. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 23:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete redundant with List of charismatic leaders as defined by Max Weber's classification of authority. It's hard enough keeping the list itself 'clean' of assertions that 'person x belongs here because I have a quote saying s/he was charismatic'. Maralia (talk) 21:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, Johnbod, Lquilter...Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename all. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Ajax Amsterdam to Category:AFC Ajax

Propose renaming Category:Ajax Amsterdam managers to Category:AFC Ajax managers

Propose renaming Category:Ajax Amsterdam players to Category:AFC Ajax players

Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match the category's main article. I am also nominating the category's subcategories for the same reason. – PeeJay 18:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related page moves. – PeeJay 18:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename all per nom & for consistency. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename all per nom. Sebisthlm (talk) 00:48, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename all per PeeJay. Aecis^Brievenbus 22:07, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:El Cor de la Ciutat (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete - eponymous overcategorization for TV series. Material doesn't warrant the category per extensive precedent. Otto4711 (talk) 17:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom & ample precedent. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bear in the Big Blue House (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete - unnecessary eponymous category for the show article. Otto4711 (talk) 17:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom & ample precedent. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The Elder Scrolls creatures (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category now empty. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Metroid characters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Empty category due to article consolidation. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. TTN (talk) 23:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was merge into Category:Mortal Kombat. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Factions in Mortal Kombat (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: All other factions have been deleted except one, upmerge to category Mortal Kombat. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. -Andrew c ^[talk] 22:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Players who played for both Old Firm clubs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Upmerge to both parents, most players have played for several teams during their careers, and switching to a rival team isn't that uncommon. If kept it should at least be Renamed since Old Firm may not be well known outside of Scotland. -- Prove It ^(talk) 15:01, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• *This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related deletions. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 18:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as recreation of deleted category: see previous discussion. Tagged. Bencherlite^Talk 23:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Speedy delete has been declined on the basis that the category is at CfD and is populated. Should have nuked it myself... Bencherlite^Talk 19:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I thought this had coem up before. The previous CfD was fairly clear-cut, so I don't see why it could not have been speedied. The category was populated by its creator. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 19:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Bencherlite & nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I didn't know of the previous CfD debate but that deletion seems to have been based on an argument which seems to be "We should delete this article to prevent others like it from being created", which is logically identical to the WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS argument which has so often been described as fallacious. ugen64 (talk) 05:03, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete since it is not a defining characteristic and is over categorization. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete/upmerge. -Andrew c ^[talk] 22:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:San Andreas (Grand Theft Auto) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: There is now only one article in this category. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 14:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Category:Grand Theft Auto (video game) 132.205.99.122 (talk) 20:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Upmerge to Category:Grand Theft Auto locations (as a better alternative to anon's suggestion). The category previously lists other relevant articles, which eventually merged to San Andreas (Grand Theft Auto). The category has basically outlived its purpose. ╫ ２５ ^{◀RingADing▶} ╫ 17:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Upmerge per 2 5. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was merge. -Andrew c ^[talk] 22:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:Political games to Category:Government simulation video games

Nominator's rationale: Merge, Very small category. Main article up for AfD. SharkD (talk) 06:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge. Category name should be self-explanatory. Doczilla (talk) 07:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom, lest we have dirty tricks included. :-) Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The Elder Scrolls lore (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category is probably empty as you read this, and as of my writing has one article about to be deleted and the other merged, so it will soon be empty. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 06:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It should not be deleted because it was just created.

...last march, and most of the articles in the category have been deleted, with the final two likely to be too. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 13:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:36, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional loners (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete wholly subjective category that cannot have any objective or non-arbitrary inclusion criteria. Doczilla (talk) 04:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete arbitrary criteria for inclusion. Maralia (talk) 21:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete subjective per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 05:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Delaware State Representatives to Category:Members of the Delaware House of Representatives

Nominator's rationale: Rename. To avoid confusion with Category:Members of the United States House of Representatives from Delaware; main article is at Delaware House of Representatives; proposed name conforms to general format of subcategories of Category:Members of state lower houses in the United States. Snocrates 04:22, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 05:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Members of the Nevada Senate to Category:Nevada State Senators

Nominator's rationale: Rename. All other subcategories of Category:State senators of the United States are named "Foo State Sentators"; rename for consistency. Snocrates 03:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was merge. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 05:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merging Category:Legislative branch of Oklahoma government to Category:Oklahoma Legislature

Nominator's rationale: Merge, Duplicate material and names are different ways of referring to the same thing. No other U.S. state has similarly-named category of "Legislative branch of Foo". Snocrates 02:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 05:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Legislative Branch of the Government of Puerto Rico to Category:Legislative Assembly of Puerto Rico

Nominator's rationale: Use actual name of body; main article is at Legislative Assembly of Puerto Rico. Snocrates 02:43, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename as nominated. The proposed merge makes a lot of sense, but the larger category will have to be nominated first.--Mike Selinker (talk) 02:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:U.S. territorial lower houses by territory to Category:Territorial lower houses in the United States

Category:U.S. territorial upper houses by territory to Category:Territorial upper houses in the United States

Nominator's rationale: Expand "U.S."; "by territory" doesn't seem necessary here; format is mirror of Category:State lower houses in the United States and Category:State upper houses in the United States. Snocrates 02:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Support nom or suggest the territories and state be merged together, into Category:State and territorial upper houses in the United States and Category:State and territorial lower houses in the United States. Only three territories have bicameral legislatures, so the two categories will remain this size. Rigadoun (talk) 04:23, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd be fine with the merge options too, though it may cause problems with parent category Category:Territorial legislatures of the United States unless it too is merged with Category:State legislatures of the United States. Snocrates 04:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. Until there's a merge proposal, Nebraska will probably have to go in the upper house category.--Mike Selinker (talk) 02:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Speakers of state Houses of Representatives to Category:Speakers of state lower houses in the United States

Nominator's rationale: Not all lower houses in U.S. states are called "House of Representatives". For example, a subcategory is Category:Speakers of the New York Assembly. The proposed rename is more generic and is a mirror of its parent, Category:State lower houses in the United States. Snocrates 02:01, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment what do we do with Nebraska with a unicameral legislature? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nebraska seems to have been simply left out of the entire "upper house" / "lower house" categorization scheme. There are 49 articles in Category:State lower houses in the United States. See also Category:Nebraska Legislature and its subcategories and the related Nebraska CFD below. It used to be bicameral, and there is a Category:Nebraska State Senators, but it probably needs to be sorted out, because I notice some individuals who are included there are members of the unicameral Legislature and not State Senators. Snocrates 22:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Oh My Goddess! episodes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The various episodes have been redirected, so it no longer has any use. TTN (talk) 01:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:49, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Wisconsin State Legislature to Category:Wisconsin Legislature

Nominator's rationale: Main article is at Wisconsin Legislature; subcategory is Category:Members of the Wisconsin Legislature; rename for consistency. Snocrates 01:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:49, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Nebraska State Legislators to Category:Members of the Nebraska Legislature

Nominator's rationale: Parent category is Category:Nebraska Legislature; rename for consistency with other subcategories of Category:State legislators of the United States. Snocrates 01:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:49, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Hawaii State Legislature to Category:Hawaii Legislature

Nominator's rationale: Main article is at Hawaii Legislature; subcategory is Category:Members of the Hawaii Legislature; rename for consistency. Kingdom of Hawaii had no legislature. Snocrates 01:23, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Vermont Legislature to Category:Vermont General Assembly

Nominator's rationale: Name of the state legislature in Vermont is the General Assembly. Main article is at Vermont General Assembly. Subcategory is Category:Members of the Vermont General Assembly. Snocrates 01:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Maine State Legislature to Category:Maine Legislature

Nominator's rationale: Rename for consistency with main (ha ha) article, Maine Legislature. Subcategory is Category:Members of the Maine Legislature. Snocrates 01:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Washington State Representatives to Category:Members of the Washington House of Representatives

Nominator's rationale: To avoid confusion with Category:Members of the United States House of Representatives from Washington. Relevant article is at Washington House of Representatives; proposed name conforms to general format of subcategories of Category:Members of state lower houses in the United States. Snocrates 01:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Minnesota State Legislature to Category:Minnesota Legislature

Category:Members of the Minnesota State Legislature to Category:Members of the Minnesota Legislature

Nominator's rationale: Main article is at Minnesota Legislature; rename categories for consistency. Snocrates 01:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Alaska State Legislature to Category:Alaska Legislature

Nominator's rationale: Main article is at Alaska Legislature; subcategory is Category:Members of the Alaska Legislature; rename category for consistency. Snocrates 01:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was delete. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Delay Repay participating TOCs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Delete

Nominator's rationale: 'Delay Repay' is just the name given by some train operating companies for the clause in the National Rail Conditions of Carriage describing compensation that must be given in the event of severe delays. For this reason, every TOC must participate in 'Delay Repay', even if they don't call it that, and by that reasoning every TOC should be in this category. However, all UK TOCs are already listed here, and if a category for them is needed, it should not be named 'Delay Repay'. _TheIslander 00:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom; non-defining category. Maralia (talk) 21:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. 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.

The result of the debate was rename. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Kharkovites to Category:People from Kharkiv

Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per convention, People from Place. Kolindigo (talk) 00:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename per nom. Masterpiece2000 (talk) 04:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom. Sting_au Talk 05:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom, although at some point the Kharkov/Kharkiv issue should be reversed. --Soman (talk) 21:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.