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 14:08, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete This category is poorly named; it stands for 'Adult Fans Of Lego', but most readers would not know that. However, it seems like a bad idea for a category in any case; we don't generally categorise people by what they're fans of. I would suggest deleting it and replacing it with a more general 'Category:Lego people', to include articles such as Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen and Nathan Sawaya. Terraxos (talk) 22:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as its article has gone. ('Category:Lego people' is a good idea IMO but doesn't need a cfd.) Occuli (talk) 00:49, 15 November 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:United States House of Representatives election candidates[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:merge, feel free to renominate for renaming at your leisure. Kbdank71 14:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:Merge, They're duplicates. I created both of them, and I messed up. —Markles 15:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both; this is not a defining characteristic. To my mind, an unelected official is really not notable as such. --EliyakT·C 03:11, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But what if they're sufficiently notable to merit an article?—Markles 14:21, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Keeping this will also result in the addition of this category to every successful candidate as well; there's nothing about this category that would limit it to only unelected unsuccessful candidates. Postdlf (talk) 03:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's not true. The category states, "This category includes people who are not members United States House of Representatives and who either: (a) are current candidates; OR (b) were unsuccessful candidates in the past."—Markles 11:53, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I'd accept that suggestion to change the name, although a less-clumsy name might be preferred. Nevertheless, this CFM proposal is intended to remove a redundant category. Can we first get rid of that one, and then do a CFR?—Markles 19:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How dare you make such a reasonable suggestion? Merge per nom. Postdlf (talk) 04:14, 19 November 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 14:11, 20 November 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.
