Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 June 30
Contents
- 1 June 30
- 1.1 Category:Human care
- 1.2 Category:Raymond E. Feist Books
- 1.3 Category:Bragança → Category:Dukes of Braganza
- 1.4 Category:Irish Stamp → Category:Irish postage stamp images
- 1.5 Category:Women's football competitions
- 1.6 Category:Buffy characters
- 1.7 Category:Shoegazing musical groups
- 1.8 Category:Indian rivers
- 1.9 Category:Mexican state elections, 2004
June 30
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 7 July 2005 13:22 (UTC)
I removed this category from its parent category of healthcare as I believe it to be superfluous. The category does not contain any articles now. There remains a stub article on human care that I have edited and placed into category:nursing --Vincej 30 June 2005 23:15 (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 7 July 2005 13:18 (UTC)
Recent merges have reduced this category to only two members. Even if all the books listed on the Raymond E. Feist page (now mostly redlinks or redirects) get created, they will all presumaply be linkd to from that page, and link back to that page, so there is no need of a category in any case. DES 30 June 2005 21:45 (UTC)
- Keep but merge with presently non-existent (but linked-to) Category:Raymond E. Feist Characters (and fix capitalization for both). Feist is a major author, and we have precedent for categorizing an author's fictional setting. There's quite a bunch of Feisty articles here already (that lack cats), and potential for a dozen more. Radiant_>|< June 30, 2005 23:47 (UTC)
- What would you suggest as a proper name for such a joint category? I can't think of any that isn't akwardly long.DES 1 July 2005 16:51 (UTC)
- Category:Raymond E. Feist seems an appropriate category to me 67.68.64.213 2 July 2005 00:08 (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 merge --Kbdank71 7 July 2005 13:15 (UTC)
- Duplicated category. 2 articles only, including Duke of Braganza...--Nabla 2005-06-30 18:55:27 (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 7 July 2005 13:11 (UTC)
- This is a category of image files, not of articles about stamps. I propose renaming for clarity, rather than just fixing the existing capitalization issue. Russ Blau (talk) June 30, 2005 17:32 (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 7 July 2005 13:06 (UTC)
Empty. Marked as Cfd on June 13th by User:Wonderfool but not listed here. --Kbdank71 30 June 2005 15:21 (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 7 July 2005 13:09 (UTC)
Rename to Category:Buffy the Vampire Slayer characters. (marked as Cfr on June 20 but not listed here). --Kbdank71 30 June 2005 15:18 (UTC)
- Rename, but merge with Category:Angel (series) characters to create Category:Buffyverse characters. -Sean Curtin June 30, 2005 19:44 (UTC)
- I believe this was marked because of three other Buffy related categories that were renamed the same way. See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 June 15 --Kbdank71 30 June 2005 20:31 (UTC)
- Rename, to Buffy the Vampire Slayer characters. I wouldn't merge it with Angel as they are different shows.Gateman1997 30 June 2005 22:57 (UTC)
- Rename, do not merge (to keep in sync with the cats for episodes and cast/crew). Radiant_>|< June 30, 2005 23:48 (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 no consensus (keep) --Kbdank71 7 July 2005 13:08 (UTC)
- Shoegazing was not really a musical genre, more a label tagged by the music press on bands they perceived as unexciting live acts. Categorizing bands as shoegazers is expressing a POV I think. The current members of the category can all be categorized in Category:Indie rock groups. Worldtraveller 30 June 2005 10:41 (UTC)
- Keep Shoegazing was the name given to the scene with which almost all of these artists were heavily identified. Shoegazing gets 237 000 hits, and is no longer a derogatory term. Many movements and scenes are known by names which were applied negatively, cf The Impressionists, this does not mean that the label, if in popular usage, should be denied. And I further disagree that it isn't a musical genre, all groups identified with the scene having similarities of sound, a sound typically defined by My Bloody Valentine's Isn't Anything and Loveless. And lots of categories are subjective. Hiding 3 July 2005 21:54 (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 7 July 2005 13:07 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:Rivers of India to conform to the geographic categories standard at the country level. RedWolf June 30, 2005 02:27 (UTC)
- Agree. But why stop there? Category:Chinese rivers also exists. Shouldn't this be changed to either Category:Rivers of China or Category:Rivers of the People's Republic of China? --TheDotGamer Talk June 30, 2005 22:48 (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 7 July 2005 13:06 (UTC)
Empty. Articles are in parent category (along with those of other years; this was the only "year" cat created). Not really needed for the five 2004 state elections that have articles. –Hajor 30 June 2005 01:47 (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.