< August 21 August 23 >

August 22

Category:Preserved beam engines

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:25, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Articles about individual pieces of equipment are generally named individual. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:42, 22 August 2012 (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:Hurricane stubs

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: Speedy rename C2C/C2D. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match the permanent category (Category:Tropical cyclones) and main article (tropical cyclone). "Hurricane" and "Typhoon" are local names for the more general "tropical cyclone". Propose renaming template ((hurricane-stub)) to ((tropical-cyclone-stub)). Dawynn (talk) 22:21, 22 August 2012 (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:Doctor Who radio stories

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The result of the discussion was: withdrawn. – Fayenatic London 20:03, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Redundant to Category:Doctor Who audio plays; all the contents are also in the latter which has a well-developed set of sub-categories, e.g. Category:Eighth Doctor audio plays. – Fayenatic London 21:59, 22 August 2012 (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:Horse-related accidents

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 to Category:Horse-related accidents and incidents. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:24, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Contrived and vague usage; people ordinarily say "horse accident". This may be the only accident category which uses "related". Mangoe (talk) 14:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would rather prune those that are not accidental (e.g. the suffragette who committed suicide by throwing herself in front of a horse). Co-opting the subject of the article in order to justify the naming scheme doesn't strike me as a good approach. And if we have to get fastidious about whether the horse was injuries, I would sooner prefer Category:Accidents involving horses; but then we'll end up renaming all the rest of the accidents in the same manner. I think that people understand that "horse accidents" here is to be understood as "involving horses" rather than as "to horses". Mangoe (talk) 17:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • On these sorts of things, there's such a fine line at times. Plus there are those things which are "unknown" the cause. As for -related, while I'd like to presume others' understanding, we both have seen (even just at CfD alone) how people can come up with surprising interpretations of terms : ) - I understand your concern about -related having a potential subjective feature, which is part of why I'm not strongly tied to it. But, I do think it's more clear with it, than without it. - jc37 18:00, 22 August 2012 (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:Mayors of Owasso, Oklahoma

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 to Category:People from Owasso, Oklahoma and Category:Mayors of places in Oklahoma. The Bushranger One ping only 00:20, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Only has one entry ...William 13:32, 22 August 2012 (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:Hellcat Records groups

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: Speedy rename C2C. Timrollpickering (talk) 21:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per consistency with other record labels' categories. benzband (talk) 09:49, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And the fact that they're not all groups. benzband (talk) 12:23, 22 August 2012 (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 Taylor Swift

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: speedy delete per WP:CSD#G7. Jenks24 (talk) 11:41, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. All "Wikipedians by individual band/artist" categories were previously deleted here due to being too narrow to foster collaboration. Additionally "who like" as this particular category has does not suggest any inclination to collaborate. Further, this particular category was previously brought for debate but was requested for deletion by the author amidst the discussion, see here. Suggest a full length discussion proceed so G4-deletion precedent can be established this time. VegaDark (talk) 04:55, 22 August 2012 (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 aspire to" 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: delete. The Bushranger One ping only 00:21, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose deleting Category:Wikipedians who aspire to attend The University of Cambridge (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Nominator's rationale: Delete all - We each can "aspire" to do numerous things, but it doesn't foster collaboration to categorize us by such aspirations. If allowed, this would open the door to any number of "who aspire to" categories. VegaDark (talk) 04:37, 22 August 2012 (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:Game images

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: keep. The Bushranger One ping only 00:21, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: per WP:SMALLCAT. Two member categories and Warhammer media‎ can be included in the other one. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 01:28, 22 August 2012 (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:Pumping stations

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Keep. Self closing since it is clear that this is not going to be deleted. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:03, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Really more of a discussion. This is a collection of pumping stations. Some are for water supply, some for sewage systems and others for agricultural use. So this is effectively a collection of like named things which we tend to avoid. One option could be to split it out by type, but given the size, I'm not sure that is called for. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
More