Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 September 19
Contents
- 1 September 19
- 1.1 Category:German Painters
- 1.2 Category:Legend of Zelda Songs
- 1.3 Category:Founders of religions or sects
- 1.4 Category:Embassies in Ottawa
- 1.5 Category:Hills
- 1.6 category:Norwegian education
- 1.7 Category:Barney & Friends related stubs
- 1.8 Category:Category:Universities and colleges in Cyprus
- 1.9 Category:Historic fires to Category:Fires
- 1.10 Category:Historic weather events
- 1.11 Stadiums and arenas
September 19
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. ∞Who?¿? 01:52, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Capitalization error; Category:German painters already exists. Delete Hathawayc 23:59, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No argument. siafu 00:10, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per nom. No articles. ~----
- 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. ∞Who?¿? 01:51, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This category is currently empty, and since the article Legend of Zelda series songs covers all songs in the series, there is not much room for expansion. Pagrashtak 23:37, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No argument. siafu 00:19, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Personally, I think all of the songs in Legend of Zelda should be deleted. It would never be in any other encyclopedia. It's not very useful. Just my opinion Brian1979 20:52, 20 September 2005 (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 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. ∞Who?¿? 01:50, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There are already categories for people associated with religions either as leaders or as notable for a religion. (Previous CfD ended 3.5 no consensus.) ≈ jossi ≈ 23:25, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete same reasons as before. ∞Who?¿? 03:19, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Nothing has changed. siafu 05:41, 20 September 2005 (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 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 19:47, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I renamed the category to Category:Embassies and High Commissions in Ottawa to be more descriptive of the category, thus the old one is redundant. --File:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 20:47, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It might have been better to name it Category:Diplomatic missions in Ottawa as it also contains the Papal Nuncio, and eventually will hold the Libyan People's Bureau. - SimonP 00:04, 21 September 2005 (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 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. ∞Who?¿? 01:48, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This category seems unloved and completley pointless. I mean, nothing really links gravity hills, artifical dwelling hills, a british peak baggers list and some grassy lumps in Hungary. All of these are categorised better elsewhere. Most of the parts of the world that are notable for being higher than their surrounding are well served by Category:Mountains. Grinner 09:24, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Clearly useful and different from Category:Mountains. CalJW 13:37, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Looks useful enough to me. TexasAndroid 14:19, 22 September 2005 (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 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. ∞Who?¿? 01:45, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
75 out of 76 national education categories are in the "Education in X" form, so I would like to see this one renamed category:Education in Norway. CalJW 08:18, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename. ∞Who?¿? 19:14, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename, per nom. -Roby Wayne Talk • Hist 17:10, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename. -- Reinyday, 04:06, 21 September 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 Moved to WP:SFD. ∞Who?¿? 19:13, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Not a true stub category, malformed, has only two entries. Kamezuki 03:33, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Outside the scope of this page - take it to WP:SFD Grutness...wha? 03:49, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note, discussion moved to WP:SFD see the listing here. ∞Who?¿? 19:13, 19 September 2005 (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 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 Speedy deleted. ∞Who?¿? 19:07, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Malformed category name, no entries, and there's already a Category:Universities and colleges in Cyprus. Kamezuki 03:33, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy. I suppose this counts as "spelling". siafu 03:54, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy tag added. ∞Who?¿? 05:23, 19 September 2005 (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 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. ∞Who?¿? 01:44, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Previously listed under an umbrella nom, but not tagged, just listing here. ∞Who?¿? 02:47, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename. No argument. siafu 03:55, 19 September 2005 (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 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 to Category:Weather events. ∞Who?¿? 01:43, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Previously listed under an umbrella nom, but not tagged, just listing here. Note: comments were made about individual removal or articles before deletion, recommend reading previous listing. ∞Who?¿? 02:47, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename. No argument. siafu 04:03, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename Osomec 16:19, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note it was requested that this be done manually by users that have some knowledge in this area. ∞Who?¿? 01:43, 26 September 2005 (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 category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.
Stadiums and arenas
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. ∞Who?¿? 01:40, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Corporations with naming rights of stadiums and Category:Corporations with naming rights of indoor arenas are the only two subs of a previous cfd, so they have been nominated for deletion as well. They seem not to serve any useful categorization purpose, but just listing the nom. ∞Who?¿? 00:06, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, same reasoning as the other one. - SimonP 19:28, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per previous (frivolous categorization). siafu 17:46, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Listify and delete - category not necessary, but information isn't totally useless. Dbinder 00:23, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- delete Trivial characteristic in the context of a major company's overall profile. Bhoeble 17:58, 23 September 2005 (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 category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.