< May 6 May 8 >

May 7

Category:Types of buses

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 per nom. delldot ∇. 04:19, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Merge. This is an unnecessary double category level about more or less the exact same thing, just with different wording. Other interwikis keep to one level. Bergenga (talk) 11:01, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom (the merge direction doesn't really matter, I'm fine with the proposal, after all) Marcocapelle (talk) 08:09, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously it needs a cleanup from how it is now, but why is it supposed to be two different categories? It only makes things harder to find. That the subcategories contain articles about such types of buses is rather obvious, and I don't see how having two separate categories make it better. I could (maybe) sort of see the point if Types of buses was the top level and Buses by type at the lower level, but now that they are the other way around it seems not logical at all. Bergenga (talk) 09:47, 9 May 2015 (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.

Jubilee 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: Speedy rename under C2A. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Propose renaming
Nominator's rationale
Align names with the titles of the related articles: golden jubilee, silver jubilee.

--iudexvivorum (talk) 04:54, 7 May 2015 (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:Books about preventing homosexuality

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 without prejudice to a follow-up nomination to rename this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:37, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Category is unnecessary. Name is also a serious concern and non-neutral as it clearly implies homosexuality can be prevented. Most of the books in the category fail guidelines. Author of category has devoted a significant amount of time to article related to sexual orientation change efforts AusLondonder (talk) 00:33, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not an attack, it's a simple fact. AusLondonder (talk) 00:48, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's irrelevant. Categories aren't deleted because the person who created them made x number of edits to an article. Try addressing the substantive issues. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 00:55, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Hi there User:Mellowed Fillmore, nice to see your well-explained, constructive contribution on another deletion discussion relating to homosexuality. It's not a vote, by the way. AusLondonder (talk) 05:34, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't you just tell me at another discussion to review WP:AGF and WP:NPA? Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 14:08, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, what does this not being a vote have to do with anything? Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 16:06, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Books about sexual orientation change efforts" is a much broader category; it is less specific and focused than "books about preventing homosexuality", and hence less useful. If the name of the category is a concern, then let me make a comparison: "Books about astral projection". Such a title wouldn't be understood to imply that astral projection is a real possibility, only that the books are written by people who believe it is a possibility. The same applies to preventing homosexuality. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 22:56, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To what? RevelationDirect (talk) 18:47, 14 May 2015 (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:Thievery Corporation

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. MER-C 11:44, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Per WP:OCEPON. Nominated this 5 years ago yet there is still no precedent before or since to keep general categories such as these when the artist's albums and songs categories (which also interlink to one other) provide sufficient navigation. Usually a band members category tips the scale in favor of keeping, but no members from this band have articles. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:19, 7 May 2015 (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