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. – Black Falcon(Talk) 00:26, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:Delete - eponymous overcategorization unwarranted by the material. Otto4711 (talk) 22:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom; not needed. Johnbod (talk) 01:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - normally I would support the proposal, but there is not only the bio article, but also substantial one on a picture. I wonder whether there are not other pictures with articles that ought to populate this category. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:31, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A person's works are not categorized under a category for the person but for the works in a subcat of Category:Works by artist. Otto4711 (talk) 22:01, 21 February 2008 (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.
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. Black Falcon(Talk) 00:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agree could be ambiguous Kathleen.wright5 21:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a single entry category. If kept, then rename as proposed since the present name is completely ambiguous. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete since the one item is already in the suggested merge target. Otto4711 (talk) 01:09, 18 February 2008 (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.
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:rename. Kbdank71 15:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A better alternative might be Lancaster, England, since the town gives its name to the county. However I have no dtrong views. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterkingiron (talk • contribs) 21:34, 21 February 2008 (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.
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. Kbdank71 15:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:Merge, No need for a separate subcategory. There are no subcats for other nationalities and the parent category itself isn't huge. DH85868993 (talk) 13:26, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Personally I'd support deleting both categories as it seems 100% of the former and 90% of the latter appears merely to be racing drivers who have started their careers in kart racing, when in reality 90% of all notable modern era drivers started in karts, so both categories merely consititute extra category without creating new information. Both are essentially irrelevant. --Falcadore (talk) 07:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above rationale. Adrian M. H. 14:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete category and change category focus of Category:kart racing drivers. Per Adrian's excellent suggestion at WikiProject Motorsport, only people who are know for winning major national to international championships/races should be included in this category. Otherwise it gets too big and unusable. Without discussing the exact percentage, way too many drivers in almost all genres of racing/motorsport have raced karts at some time in their past. Listing every notable driver who has ever raced karts is overwhelming. Royalbroil 16:26, 19 February 2008 (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.
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 delete, creator's request. BencherliteTalk 01:19, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:I meant to create this category on Commons Your reason(s) for the proposed deletion. Rcbutcher (talk) 11:20, 16 February 2008 (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.
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:no consensus. Kbdank71 15:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know that I had to link to previous nominations, I will remember that next time. I thought that six months were a reasonable period to let the dust settle, and I also thought that a redirect instead of a deletion may sound a better solution to some users. What are your opinions?--Supparluca 08:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There seems to be ongoing disagreement (up to Jan 2008) about the name of Province of Bolzano-Bozen, to judge from its talk-page. -- roundhouse0 (talk) 17:09, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect possibly but certainly not delete. This is a political hot potato, as the German-speaking inhabitants have not entirely accepted the incproration of the area into Italy in 1918. "South Tyrol" is an English translation of a German-language term for the area. Subject to that point the present official name (apparently as nom) is the appropriate one to use. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:44, 21 February 2008 (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:Songs used in the Guitar Hero video games[edit]
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. Kbdank71 15:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category is a bad idea and similar ones that categorized songs by the places they are heard have been deleted in the past. They are somewhat like the "artist by performance" examples of overcategorization. If songs are categorized by the games they appear in, it would also make sense to categorize them by the TV shows, commercials, movies, political campaigns, etc... in which they can be heard. This is why we have lists (though I suspect that the lists would end up on AFD as well). ☑ SamuelWantman 00:41, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - songs by video game is an extremely poor categorization scheme. Otto4711 (talk) 01:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - We don't categorize based on all the different uses of a work: its various appearances in anthologies and so on. --Lquilter (talk) 15:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Great game series, terrible category.--Mike Selinker (talk) 18:07, 16 February 2008 (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.
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:speedily deleted by Anetode as a contribution of a banned user . BencherliteTalk 01:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Created for an article which was speedy deleted for failure to provide claims of notability. Corvus cornixtalk 00:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Not only is it unclear what this category is, but it also appears to be misspelled. --Metropolitan90(talk) 08:03, 16 February 2008 (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.
