< July 18 July 20 >

July 19

Category:People from Gayville, South Dakota

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:05, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. Just one person in the category and town is under 500 in population. Little chance for growth ...William 22:38, 19 July 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:Free-floating objects

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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 18:38, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Current name is highly ambiguous; could be free-floating objects in water, or any number of other things. Proposed name would fit under both parent Category:Substellar objects and the actual description the category gives for its contents. The Bushranger One ping only 01:50, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon (talk) 15:24, 19 July 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:Palaces in the Philippines

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:07, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: First of all, this is a very small category. I'm unsure exactly how big it could possibly get. The main reason is that it's odd to use 'Palaces' to denote a set of Philippine buildings. They haven't got royalty running around them, historical or contemporary. The cat is more likely to mislead the reader than to help them navigate. CMD (talk) 08:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There were, and still are, some local "royals". An example is the people behind the Sultanate of Sulu and some other Muslim royals in Lanao del Sur, although I dunno if they live in palaces. For a list, see Category:Philippine Royalty and Nobility (probably a candidate for renaming as per capitalization, at the very least). –HTD 01:37, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Archbishop-s-Palace-of-Manila now you do know. Johnbod (talk) 16:25, 19 July 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:Arabic Art

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:08, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Rename with lower case. Alternatively, as it's a small category, upmerge to Category:Islamic art and Category:Arabic culture; but there may well be scope to grow the category. (There is no lead article, hence I brought it here for a full discussion rather than speedy renaming.) – Fayenatic London 08:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support that rename too, though I think either is fine. Johnbod (talk) 13:13, 23 July 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:Arab world culture

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:Arab culture by nationality. The Bushranger One ping only 01:28, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge and redirect. This seems to be a category holding national culture categories across the Arab League. It's not needed. – Fayenatic London 08:21, 19 July 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:Cubic equations of state

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:09, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: The category Category:Equations of state is not very populated, this distinction is not needed. (Upmerge articles) Brad7777 (talk) 08:03, 19 July 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:Functionalism

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: Split. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Of the 25 articles and 2 sub-category. 12 articles treat this category as if it means functionalism (social theory). (These fit the category description). 5 articles and 1 sub-category treat this category as if it refers to Functionalism (architecture). The remaining 8 articles and 1 sub-cat, are to do with Functionalism (international relations) (3 articles), Functionalism (philosophy of mind) (2 articles, 1 sub-cat) and the functionalist perspective in linguistics (3 articles). This split chooses the versions which would be most populated. 8/25 articles and 1 sub-category would not fit this split. But this split would group only relevant articles together and make things a bit clearer. imo it would be worth the split into 5 categories. Brad7777 (talk) 22:05, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:51, 19 July 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:Biology prefixes and suffixes

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:Biological nomenclature. The Bushranger One ping only 01:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose renaming Category:Biology prefixes and suffixes to Category:Affixes used in Biology
Nominator's rationale: Improvement of grammar. Brad7777 (talk) 14:12, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Relisting comment: See related discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:18, 19 July 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:Fort Gadsden

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:09, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT - single-article category (formerly contained an image, now at Commons) with no chance of expansion and not part of an established category tree. Sole article is already categorised in the parent cat. The Bushranger One ping only 03:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Not sure why I created it originally, maybe there were other articles that needed a category. If there is only one article, it should be deleted as unnecessary. Gamweb (talk) 08:10, 20 July 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:Saint Leo College Preparatory School alumni

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Saint Leo College Preparatory School is a former name of Saint Leo University. I believe it's the general standard to categorise alumni by the current name of the institution, not by the name of the institution at the time. The Bushranger One ping only 02:53, 19 July 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:University fire brigades

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. Not part of an established category tree, little potential for expansion, not significant enough to merit splitting from the by-state category. All contents are located in CA so that is the merge target. The Bushranger One ping only 02:39, 19 July 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:People from David City, Nebraska

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT with only four entries. People from Butler County article has that many. ...William 00:42, 19 July 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:People from Dwight, Nebraska

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT with only two entries and little chance of growing due to town population of 204 ...William 00:39, 19 July 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:People from Rising City, Nebraska

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT with only two entries and little chance of growing due to town population of less than 400 ...William 00:38, 19 July 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:Yule songs

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. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:SMALLCAT. Not a defining characteristic of the songs in question and with a definition that emphasises its subjectivity and nebulousness. The Bushranger One ping only 00:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The category text mixes up several different themes in the text added, Germanic paganism (where the term “Yule” appears to come from), the more general paganism and Heathen which is a redirect to paganism anyway. One of the songs does not make any claim that would entitle to be a member of this category, another I am very suspicious of its right to be in this category. This is a category without a main article and is very misleading as a consequence. I do think there is a worthwhile article on this subject to be written, not sure WP will need this category then, either. --Richhoncho (talk) 08:18, 20 July 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