Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 February 23
February 23
All the current examples are mammals, and I suspect all future members will be as well. This renaming would also entail this category being changed from a subcategory of Category:Animals to Category:Mammals. Stemonitis 15:56, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
They are the same thing. Right now, cat:USCongress redirects to cat:LBoftheUSG. However, the cat ought to be called Category:United States Congress and cat:LBoftheUSG should redirect to it. —Mark Adler (markles) 14:58, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Strong oppose. This conforms to Category:Judicial Branch of the United States Government and Category:Executive Branch of the United States Government, which cannot be similarly renamed, as those branches are not one unitary body or office. The U.S. government is organized into three branches, and the category system, as it is, properly reflects that. Postdlf 16:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
In the categorization of the editors on this site, they are referred to as Wikipedians, not users. All the other categories are called "Blank" Wikipedians - Esprit15d 14:27, 23 February 2006 (UTC).
Rename in accordance with local usage as in Saint Lucia'sMinistry of Communications, Works, Transport & Public Utilities CalJW 10:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC).
It seems that this category should use "station" like the UK and Australia rather than "plant" like the U.S. because five of the entries use "station" but none use "plant". Rename Choalbaton 09:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC).
This should be renamed as all the other by sport subcategories of Category:Sports by country use "country" rather than "nation". Choalbaton 08:33, 23 February 2006 (UTC).
This should have been deleted at the same time as its three sparsely populated subcategories. The system in place is to use Category:Sports venues by country. Choalbaton 08:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC).
Category:People shot by standing Vice Presidents to Category:People shot by sitting Vice Presidents of the United States
Correct English usage and clarify scope. (Since it was no concensus on delete, but there were also several proposals for renaming.) JRP 06:28, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Rename. Absolutely. They're definitely not standing, and they're definitely from the U.S.--Mike Selinker 06:44, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
NOTE: Since posting, category has been deleted, recreated, and deleted again. If an admin wants to delete this CFR, please go ahead. The category is currently in Wikipedia:Deletion_review and could be created again... JRP 06:51, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. Man, this makes me angry. I'm not opposed to there being a review of this page, or that it comes to different conclusions than this forum, but the fact that there's no way to know about it unless somebody posts a request like the one above is very frustrating. At the very least, the review board's actions should be posted back here, and some time should be given for comment.--Mike Selinker 16:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Replaced by Category:Malagasy alpine skiers (harmonization of Category:Alpine skiers). -- Citius 02:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; does not follow existing naming conventions for skier categories. --Muchness 02:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Rename. Sure.--Mike Selinker 16:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Rename. Currently the category contains an abbreviation, and the "Apple" is slightly ambiguous. By unambiguously naming the company and expanding the category from mere CEOs to all senior executives it has more potential for growth and brings it in line with, for instance, Category:Disney executives and Category:Ford executives. - choster 00:40, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
A strange way of categorising fictional characters based on the company producing or distributing the film they appeared in - one from Wallace and Gromit, one from Shrek and one group from Madagascar. I could understand Disney characters, or Aardman animations characters, but the characters in this category don't really have much in common. JW 00:14, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. There is some Disney-like commonality between most of their traditionally-animated films, but there aren't that many of those, and the set isn't easy to define. ×Meegs 14:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC)