Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 June 9
Contents
- 1 June 9
- 1.1 Category:Internet domains
- 1.2 Category:Lists of Mega Man characters
- 1.3 Category:Inheritance races
- 1.4 Category:2000 by month
- 1.5 Category:Persian Gulf War
- 1.6 Category:Terpenes
- 1.7 Category:Comic strip creators
- 1.8 Category:Comic creators
- 1.9 Category:Comic book artists
- 1.10 Category:Comic book writers
- 1.11 Category:Dodgers - Retired Numbers
- 1.12 Category:Korean confucianism
June 9
edit- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 13:16, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Apparent garbage doppleganger of Category:Domain name stubs. -R. S. Shaw 21:48, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
delete. While i don't think this is a doppleganger of Category:Domain name stubs, i don't see a point in keeping a category for domains as such - it's like keeping a category:phone numbers. Sebastian (talk) 05:55, 2005 Jun 10 (UTC)
- delete Another mis-categorization, articles would have been listed together with no relevant information between them. Might be fun to have the cat Sebastian mentions, give me numbers to call when i'm bored ;) - <>Who?¿? 04:25, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was keep --Kbdank71 13:21, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
There is no real reasonable reason for the lists of the characters to be in their own category. They are much more applicable (and accessable) in the parent category (Category:Mega Man characters) categorizing them all with a *. --TheDotGamer Talk 21:41, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, but reparent, as a child of the main Mega Man category. It's a useful navigation aid for people interested in just the individual listings of characters in the games. For example, in Category:Pokémon, the individual pokemon Pokémon character articles are separated from the Pokémon lists articles. The separation of characters and lists is planning for future expansion and will save time from future recategorizing. As the Mega Man characters category continues to grow, there will be a lot more individual character articles being added to the page along with more lists. Separating the characters and the lists will cut down on the loading time for people with slow connections and conserve server time by loading either the set of characters or set of lists rather than both sets at the same time. Sixpence 03:21, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. It's not uncommon to separate characters from lists, such as Category:Lists of Nintendo characters. ! 03:35, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. I don't find it useful and I doubt anyone ever would. Trust me, I'm a hard core gamer and this category is useless to me. Who in their right mind would ever need such a category? Brick Wall 03:38, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Also, this category was inappropriately depopulated while this CfD was still ongoing. I'm restoring the articles to it, they can be moved again if this CfD passes. Bryan 17:06, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep but rename to Category:Mega Man characters (I mean come on, "category of list of" is redundant). Radiant_>|< 08:57, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. It looks like a standard category setup, especially for a video game franchise that has a lot of characters. Quop 02:49, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep From browsing similar category schemes such as: Category:Lists of fictional characters, Category:Lists of Nintendo characters, Category:Lists of Pokémon, Category:Lists of computer and video game characters, it looks like a valid category. Reeve 02:51, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Wait, stop. Apparently nearly all of the keep voters above (including myself) are unaware of the fact that this category is useful but redundant with Category:Mega Man characters. It is a good topic for a category, but not for two. I think we should relist this at the top of CFD with a somewhat clearer nomination, stating it's about a merge, not a delete. Radiant_>|< 09:04, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 15:07, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Empty category. All potential articles are handled as a subsection in a main article. - UtherSRG 19:50, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. DS1953 20:57, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 13:16, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This category (now empty — it used to hold the articles January 2000, ..., December 2000) was created by User:Warofdreams following the example of Category:2001 by month, which has since been deleted. I'm nominating this one for the same reasons as the other: I feel that it makes the category system harder to use; it doesn't follow the recommendations found at Wikipedia:Categorization#Year categories (which, truth be told, I helped write); and the original creator of the category has no problem with its deletion. To help prevent future problems like this, I've added HTML comments to the chronologies at 1999, 1998, etc., back to 1990. If someone has a better solution, let me know. - dcljr (talk) 19:27, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 13:16, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Empty category created by someone who objects to the normal English term "Gulf War" (and almost all of whose edits consist of changing "Gulf" or "Arabian Gulf" to "Persian Gulf", often inappropriately. Contents copy-pasted. - Mustafaa 17:23, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Almost an exact copy of Gulf war. --Kbdank71 20:29, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Created in one single edit - apparently just copy/paste. Sebastian (talk) 05:57, 2005 Jun 10 (UTC)
- This looks like an article, not a category. Relevant parts should be integrated into an actual article before deletion. --ssd 21:36, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 13:16, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Empty category, obsoleted by Category:Terpenes and terpenoids. Eliot 17:09, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. There are 19 articles in the latter - no need to split it up. Sebastian (talk) 06:01, 2005 Jun 10 (UTC)
- Delete, at least for the moment. The category was created by mistake (by me) during a recent trawl through Category:Chemistry, and the one article it ever contained has been moved into the older Category:Terpenes and terpenoids (I forgot to tag it for speedy at the time, sorry). Physchim62 19:29, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was rename --Kbdank71 15:09, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
After discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Categories it is felt the category needs renaming to Category:Comic strip cartoonists. Creators would exclude artists who work on a strip but haven't created them, and would make it a better sub of Category:Cartoonists Hiding 14:58, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Support - SoM 16:04, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Comment It has been pointed out my memory is faulty, and this change wasn't actually discussed on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Categories as pointed out above. I still Support the change, however. Hiding 16:27, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Aye - <>Who?¿? 01:36, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was rename --Kbdank71 15:12, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
After discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Categories it is felt the category needs renaming to Category:Comics creators. This would reflect the artform comics better. Hiding 14:58, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Support - SoM 16:04, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Aye - <>Who?¿? 01:36, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- ok - Lvr 11:59, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was rename --Kbdank71 15:13, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
After discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Categories it is felt the category needs renaming to Category:Comics artists. This would better reflect the artform and also reduce confusion with regards to those who create graphic novels or European comic albums and magazines. Hiding 14:58, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Support - SoM 16:04, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Aye - <>Who?¿? 01:36, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- ok - Lvr 12:05, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was rename --Kbdank71 15:15, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
After discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Categories it is felt the category needs renaming to Category:Comics writers. This would better reflect the artform and also reduce confusion with regards to those who create graphic novels or European comic albums and magazines. Hiding 14:58, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Support - SoM 16:04, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Aye - <>Who?¿? 01:36, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- ok - Lvr 12:05, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- But "comics" is ambiguous as to whether it refers to comic books or comic strips. I say keep; graphic novel et al. is essentially synonymous with comic book anyway, but for different marketing/binding schemes. Postdlf 00:11, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The intention is for Comic Strip Cartoonists to be a subcat of this (and Comics Artists). - SoM 00:27, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- But comic book is meaningless with regards to European creators and with proper sub-categorisation, as SoM notes, those ambiguities will be solved. Hiding 10:01, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 15:16, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Needs to be renamed Category:Los Angeles Dodgers Retired Numbers Gorrister 13:49, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I would think proper capitalization would be Category:Los Angeles Dodgers retired numbers, but this strikes me as excessive overcategorization. I'd prefer delete. -- Rick Block (talk) 17:52, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
- I meant to capitalize as you stated, but I would also agree to delete Gorrister 19:00, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Well, to have your number retired is a true honor, like going to the Hall of Fame. What if I made it "MLB retired numbers" and put memebers of every MLB team? WikiDon 20:00, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete - SoM 22:52, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Convert to list and delete. -Sean Curtin 04:44, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 15:18, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Duplicates Category:Korean Confucianism. Yes, Confucianism is a proper noun. I should have raised the issue here before moving all the entries over... my mistake. -- Visviva 01:58, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
delete speedy. 0 articles. Sebastian (talk) 06:48, 2005 Jun 10 (UTC)
- Delete. Fair enough. Buffyg 09:15, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.