Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 April 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< April 1 April 3 >

April 2[edit]

Category:People from Wagram, North Carolina[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 and redirect. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per WP:SMALLCAT. Small town with only one entry. ...William 17:24, 2 April 2013 (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:Ukrainian Armenians[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: no consensus. We have two healthy category trees here, and we might need to look at the roots rather than the branches.--Mike Selinker (talk) 18:56, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Current name is confusing and ambiguous (it can mean a Ukrainian of Armenian extraction or an Armenian of Ukrainian extraction) and not into line with established naming conventions for the category tree (="Ukrainian people of ... descent"). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy discussion
Upmerge You have Category:Ukrainian people of Armenian descent already. I don't think we want to start categorizing people by degrees (e.g. are they pureblood armenian or was there some mixture. As such, I'd suggest merge all to Category:Ukrainian people of Armenian descent and delete this cat, and explain in the header that this is for all Ukranians who have Armenian ancestry - provided that (a) can be verified and (b) is somehow relevant.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 19:50, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This above idea by Obi-Wan Kenobi was my original idea at also on 20 March 2013 but became lost in discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy. Hence I support a upmerge with Category:Ukrainian people of Armenian descent too. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 20:57, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Since when did ancestry mean ethnicity??? Mayumashu (talk) 00:09, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:Ukrainian people of Armenian descent. I support merging all of the "FOOian Armenians" categories to the corresponding "FOOian people of Armenian descent". There is no good reason to have both in the category system; it's hair-splitting. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:12, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per nom. Ethnic Armenians are a distict group and worth categorizing as such.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:37, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Anyone of Armenian descent could claim to be an "ethnic Armenian". Where do we draw the line between those who are ethnic Armenians and those who are "merely" of Armenian descent? I can't see the point of having two separate schemes for this. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:51, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leave it as it is I created this page and I'd like to point out some points. 1. The reason there's "Ukrainian Armenians" and "Ukrainians of Armenian descent" are two different categories in that that "Ukrainians Armenians" are Armenians of Ukraine whereas "Ukrainian of Armenian descent" are Ukrainian people who have partial Armenian ancestry not that they are Armenian, but as Ukrainians. You can check for yourself that all other category are the same as other countries as well like "Russian Armenians" and Russian people of Armenian descent". There's a difference. IF there was no difference then I wouldn't have created a separate category and would merge it. And the "ethnic Armenian" category is very dumb. If you know how to delete that category, please do and categories like "Armenians from Istanbul" or "Armenians from Fresno" No point in mentioning that they are "ethnic" Armenian when it is already mentioned that they are Armenians. Some people are so stupid I don't know to delete or move some of these categories otherwise I would do them myself. Please delete it them for me. Now that's dumb to have a separate category based on cities because it doesn't change the fact they are still from Istanbul or Fresno and they are people of that city so need to separate category like that, so please merge them with "People from Istanbul" or "People from Fresno". User:Hovhannesk • User_talk:Hovhannesk 21:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
comment The reason there are other Armenian categories with the same setup is because User:Hovhannesk created them! I agree with GOF, we should probably do a group nomination to merge the lot of these. Hovhannesk, before we go there, it would be great if you could explain the difference you intended in creating these categories. For example, we see the following:
  1. "This page lists Azerbaijani citizens of partial Armenian ancestry or national descent. For those who are full Armenian see Category:Azerbaijani Armenians."
  2. "This page lists Azerbaijani citizens of full Armenian ancestry, national origin, or of partial descent yet who self-identify themselves as 'Armenian' first, Azerbaijani second. For those of partial Armenian descent and/or are not primarily ethnically Armenian see Category:Azerbaijani people of Armenian descent."
As I read those, they appear to be extremely fine shades of meaning, that are quite difficult to suss out from 2nd and 3rd party sources. What does it mean for someone to self-identify as 'Armenian' first, Azerbaijani second? If they published some work claiming this, would that suffice? What if they later retracted that statement, and pledge allegiance to Azerbaijan? Finally, how do you define "full" or "partial" descent? Mixing of groups is constant, there really isn't such a thing as "full-blooded" anything. For example, we take Andrey Safaryan - what makes him Category:Kazakhstani Armenians and not a Category:Kazakhstani people of Armenian descent? Certainly nothing in the article, nor the references provided in the article, could inform such a decision. Thus these categories (Fooians in Bar) are really intended to capture rough groupings, not to form some sort of perfect approximation of the correct ethnic categorization and descent. I'm sure if we looked hard enough, all of us would have Armenian, Azerbaijani, and any other blood you might care about! In any case, I'd like to hear your further thoughts on this before we nominate the rest of these cats for merging. Thanks!
NB: As to your suggestions to delete other categories, you can find instructions on how to nominate categories for deletion here: , but I'd suggest installing Wikipedia:Twinkle which automates a lot of this for you.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 23:35, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good question and thanks for twinkles. I don't know about armenian first, other second. And I don't care about full or partial decent. To me not really a big deal. Like I said previously, for example "Azerbaijani Armenians" are Armenians of Azerbaijan or from there or call them "ethnic" if you want. And "Azerbaijani people of Armenian descent" are Azerbaijani people who have Armenian ancestry. They are considered of that country who just happen to have some Armenian in them and they are to be seen as Azerbaijani, not as Armenian. Let me know if you have anymore questions. Obiwankenobi. And as to Yulia Romero, changing the category "Ethnic Armenian Ukrainian people" is very flawed and confusing. How would one know which is which? Like are they "Ukrainian Armenians" or "Armenian Ukrainians"? ONe would wonder which way it goes. And no point in putting "ethnic" when it is already mentioned what they are and also no need for "people". Let me know if you have any questions or points.(talk) 02:42, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok - but the reason I asked about self-identification and full vs partial descent is that you are the one, as far as I can tell, who added this language at the top of the categories - e.g. [1]. I'm still not sure I understand the difference between these cats, so let's try an example. Suppose Melek is born in Armenia and his parents and grandparents and so on have lived in the same village in Armenia for 1000 years - so basically as full-blood as you can get. He then picks up and moves to Azerbaijan for work and gets citizenship and publishes a book titled "Melek, the Armenian in Azerbaijan" - so he is now in Category:Azerbaijani Armenians? Now, he gets married to Nahida, who is Azerbaijani, and they have a son named Adom. Adom becomes famous in his own right, and a wikipedia article is written about him - so would Adom now be Category:Azerbaijani people of Armenian descent? Or would we have to ask him how he feels about it, and which identity he identifies more strongly with? Does it make a difference where his mother comes from? What if one or both of her parents was Armenian - would that change the calculation? Categories need to be WP:DEFINING, which means we need to be able to find sources which say X is Y. If we can't find sources that make the distinction you're trying to make, we can't have two categories of Armenians in Azerbaijan, or anywhere else for that matter...--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 06:47, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you summarized it just right. Melek is Armenian, but since he moved to Azerbaijan, becomes a citizen and make contribution to that country, he now is Azerbaijan Armenian because he represent Azerbaijan. He wouldn't become Azerbaijani Armenian if he just moved there, but since he became an integral part of Azerbaijani society, he is considered as part of that nationality. As for Adom, you are also right about him too. Because for one, he is from/born Azerbaijan, two he is considred of Azerbaijani because he is a part of that country to just happen to have armenian ancestry. I cannot determine the outcome of their feelings, however way they feel, that is up to them. As for the armenian parent calculation, there's no sole answer to this. For example, there's an "Syrian Armenian" writer or politician active in Syrian society. Therefore he is "Syrian Armenian" for whatever reason may he be born there or because of the contribution to that country, that's what defines him. Now he moves to Germany where his son is later born and/or becomes an actor in German cinema or becomes a footballer for Germany, that makes him "German Armenian". It can be for several reasons. Place of birth or for being a part of that society or country. Now let's say his son is very popular in French cinema or plays for France while stil born or originally from Germany, he can be both "German Armenian" and French Armenian". (Hovhannesk) 09:47, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. Now that I understand your rationale, I must say that while I can see the difference that it might make to people, I don't think we should try to manage this difference with two separate categories. Category:X people of Armenian descent captures all cases - someone who was born elsehwere and became an X citizen, someone who has been in X for generations but still retains his Armenian culture/blood/etc - and while the difference may be important for them, there are too many different shades and possible interpretations. Categories are a blunt tool - you're either in or out, and you need sources which back this up - and I'm afraid sources will be difficult to find for this two-category approach. Thus I keep my vote as upmerge, and will nominate the others as well. cheers, --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:43, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep it as it is. I've done everything in neatly neutral zone. There's always two subcategory for Armenians in every countries. Take a look at the Jewish examples. They have similar ones too, even more like "American Jews", "American people of Jewish descent", "American people of German-Jewish descent", "American people Russian-Jewish descent". User:Hovhannesk 19:11 3 April 2013 (ETC)

comment I think the Jewish categories are more complicated because being Jewish seems to be considered an additional "ethnoreligious" characteristic that people consider important in categorization, in addition to national origin. If you have specific ideas on category merges or deletes for the various Jewish categories you should nominate them separately. The "jewish descent" vs "jews" has to do with adherence to religion. There have been previous debates on these categories, so they are likely pretty stable at the moment, eg Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_September_28#Category:Jamaican_people_of_Jewish_descent, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_July_28#Category:American_people_of_Jewish_descent.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 02:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think you are all ignoring the reality that there has only been an independent country of Armenia since 1991. For most of history Armenians in Armenia were notions of other countries, and during the Soviet Union it was not leaving their own nation for somone to move to Kiev. You have people who identify as being Armenian and nothing else whose families have never lived within the current boundaries of Armenia. In a lot of ways being Armenian is like being Jewish. In fact if you pretended that the modern nation stae of Israel was named Judea, you would then be able to figure out exactly why the whole Armenian tree is a mess. I know, the analogy is not perfect, but it gets us close to understanding what is going on with the complexities of who is an Armenian and why people describe themselves as Armenian even though they were born in France to parents who were born in Istanbul.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I, as nominator, is also in favor of an Upmerge of "Category:Ukrainian Armenians" to "Category:Ukrainian people of Armenian descent". — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 23:45, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am very well aware of Armenia being independent since 1991. But due to official data of the world's Armenians of 8-9 million only almost 3 million born or reside in Armenia so there is a very good chance of an Armenian not being from Armenia. I strongly believe that leaving in the name it already is the most effective way in defining and categorizing. Other methods like "Ethnic Armenian Ukranian people" would be very confusing. How would one know which nationality that person is and which has which ancestry. And the difference with the Jewish categories is that we don't have "American people Russian-Armenian descent" or American people of Ukrainian-Armenian". I believe that there is no need in that and it would be too much pointless categories. We only have two separate categories, not 5 or 6. No need to mention while that person is "American Armenian" while their parents may have been "Russian Armenians". And yes about USSR, if they were in SSR of Armenia, they won't be categorized as Russian Armenians although Armenia was part of UUSR and Russia. But if they were born or are from outside of Armenia, let's say Kiev or Moscow, then they would be Ukrainian Armenians or Russian Armenians.Hovhannesk (talk) 22:42, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Arsen Avakov (politician) and Artur Ayvazyan are thus not "Ukrainian Armenians" according to Hovhannesk (both where born in Armenia)??? Yet they are categorized in the Wikipedia category "Ukrainian Armenians".... (probably not the only ones wrongly categorized). I am sorry but "Ukrainian Armenians" seems to confusing and ambiguous for most Wikipedia editors. Lets just Upmerge "Category:Ukrainian Armenian" to "Category:Ukrainian people of Armenian descent". So what if it is not 100% correct... Leaving the "Category:Ukrainian Armenian" as it is now will only lead to more "Arsen Avakov-like" mistakes... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 23:38, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yulia Romera. :How are Arsen Avakov (politician) and Artur Ayvazyan not "Ukrainian Armenians"??? Avakov is a politician member of the Ukrainian Parliament. Therefore he is part of the Ukrainian society. And Ayvazyan represented Ukraine in the Olympics, how does that not make him Ukrainian? I am not saying that they are Ukrainian by ethnicity, but by nationality. Have you not read what I've written above? I've explained the best way possible on my part and I don't how else or better ways to explain to you Yulia Romero. Like I stated in the above, there is a difference between "Ukrainian Armenians" and "Ukrainian people of Armenian descent". I don't know what else to tell you. And by the way, Avakov is not from Armenia, he is from Baku, Azerbaijan. .Hovhannesk (talk) 01:08, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't take this the wrong way Hovhannesk: I've written your explanation above above:
  • You do write above: if they were born or are from outside of Armenia, let's say Kiev, then they would be Ukrainian Armenians. Well Artur Ayvazyan was born in Yerevan, then part of the Soviet Union and now the capital of Armenia...
  • You also write above: Ukrainian Armenians are people who are a part of the Ukrainian society; in my book everybody who permanently lives in Ukraine is a part the Ukrainian society... Besides (I strongly believe) Wikipedians should not be the ones who decides for people if they are a part of a society or not... If so there should be consensus first when a person is part of a society before creating a Wikipedia category about it... Besides besides categories about Armenians (all created by Hovhannesk) this kind of "being part of a society" categories do not exist on Wikipedia (keeping in mind that Jewish people is not seen as a nationality on Wikipedia; since not all Jews are Israelis (citizens or nationals of the modern state of Israel))
You seem not to have 1 clear definition of Ukrainian Armenians... Besides since other ethical groups don't have Wiki categories that look like Ukrainian Armenians it obviously does not belong in Wikipedia. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 15:29, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know that Jewish is not a nationality, but an ethnicity. Armenian is also an ethnicity and a nationality because they have a country under the same name as Armenia. Imagine if Israel was Judea, they would use Israeli as a nationality. Ayvazian was born in Yerevan which makes him "People from Yerevan", but it does not change the fact that he has represented Ukraine in the Olympic so people see him as an Ukrainian. Take an example, look at Mesut Ozil is German footballer born in Germany to Turkish parents and he represents Germany. Therefore he is "German Turk". Another example Hamit Altıntop who is also born in Germany born to Turkish parents and he represents Turkey. The only difference between these two is their choice to represent which country. However, it does not change the fact that they are both "German Turks". It is based on birth of place, nationality, ethnicity, or representation. .Hovhannesk (talk) 14:15, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rename for clarity of intended meaning. Oppose merge because some are indeed ethnically Armenian and there is the tree Category:People by ethnicity. Obviously though determining whether one is of an ethnicity or merely of its descent can be hard to do; for bios that this is the case, then the default chose must be 'of Armenian descent'. Mayumashu (talk) 00:07, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • People of Armenian descent are just as much "ethnically Armenian" as those who claim "full" Armenian ethnicity. Really, this is splitting hairs—as you say, it's usually impossible to distinguish in actual categorizing articles, so why do we bother with the distinction? Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Hovhannesk's argument is clear. He points out the distinction between Ukrainian Armenians and Ukrainians of Armenian descent. I must reiterate, the distinction is created because some Ukrainians might not consider themselves Ukrainian Armenian since they aren't "fully" Armenian. Whereas, Ukrainians of Armenian descent is a category that helps identify people who may not consider themselves fully Armenian for whatever reason. Ultimately, they'll nevertheless have a Category on their own. In America, there are Mexican Americans, Armenian Americans, Greek Americans all used to denote ethnic background first and nationalist (citizenship) second. Proudbolsahye (talk) 17:18, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, however Category:Mexican American and Category:Greek American both do *not* contain any people - they are merely container categories, to group together things including people, but also culture, history, etc. Category:Armenian American has a few people, but it's not clear (and there is no criteria) which would determine why someone is in one or another. What someone considers themselves in this case is not applicable - we can't categorize people unless some source calls them this - and any source you care to find would not differentiate between "Greek American" and "Americans of Greek descent". If there is a broader topic of Ukrainian Armenians that includes culture, history, etc, and if it was used as a container category, then I would be ok with keeping Category:Ukrainian Armenians --> renamed to Category:Ukrainian Armenian, but I would not agree with putting people in it. You and Hovhannesk have still not defined the difference in a way that wiki editors could use in a neutral fashion.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:57, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
However being Mexican is not an ethnoreligious designation, no one is identified as Mexican in the US because of their religion. In many places the primary way people are identified as Armenian is because of their religion.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:12, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:Ukrainian people of Armenian descent. A few years ago we have a long series of discussions on Booian Fooian categories, which were mostly changed to Booian people of Fooian descent. If a person is of Ukranian nationality, but has an Armenian parent and a Russian parent, they properly have two descent categories - one for the Russian parent; the other for the Armenian. There is a difficulty with Armenians in former Ottoman ruled areas, in that the ethnic homeland of the Armenians is considerably larger than the present nation of Armenia, so that there are many Armenias who were never from the (present) Armenia, so that we have had to adopt a slightly different formulation for some Armenian ethnic categories from the usual one. However, I do not think this difficulty applies singificnatly in Ukraine, where the diapsora is likely to result from the period of USSR, not one of Muslim rule long ago. Attempts to make fine disticntions in these categories do not work, or produce miniscule triple or quadruple intersections. Peterkingiron (talk) 10:33, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Armenian is used as an ethno-religious designator in Lebanon at present, so the "long ago" line has no relevance to the discussion. At least in the part of the US I was raised in msot of our Armenians were recent immigrants from Lebanon. Anyway Armenian Christians are a distinct group within the Russian Empire and the USSR, just because other populations are Christian does not make them the same.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:36, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge per above, the current name cannot stand due to ambiguity, but the proposed name isn't that much better. Alternately it could be called Category:ethnic Armenians of Ukraine to cover the difference in being an ethnic Armenian and of Armenian-national-descent. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 13:29, 6 April 2013 (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:Works based on The Legend of Sword and Fairy[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 to Category:The Legend of Sword and Fairy and Category:Xuanyuan Jian‎, as appropriate. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Overcategorisation. We don't need to create categories just to accommodate a handful of articles which can be placed in another category which contains a larger number of related articles. LDS contact me 14:43, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also nominating the following related categories for deletion based on the same rationale above.
LDS contact me 14:50, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
They are different. What I'm suggesting is we delete the above categories and move their contents to Category:The Legend of Sword and Fairy and Category:Xuanyuan Jian‎. LDS contact me 08:33, 7 April 2013 (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:Special elections to the 114th United States Congress[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: speedy delete per WP:CSD#C1. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Delete. Empty. —GoldRingChip 14:28, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as too early. The 113th congress just started a few months ago, the 114th congress does not even began until January 2015.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:35, 2 April 2013 (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:Military aircraft of the Cold War[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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:17, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: - These categories currently contain only a few of the aircraft types developed/used during the Cold War (e.g. there are many British types not in the categories); this is unsurprising as WP:Air/C defines the categorization of aircraft articles in some detail and makes no mention of categorization by-conflict/war or by-period except by decade of first flight. Note: If, instead of deletion, WP:Air/C is changed to accommodate these categories then that should be done in a way that also works for Category:Military aircraft of World War I and Category:Military aircraft of World War II. DexDor (talk) 06:28, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per other aircraft by conflict cats recently deleted also the world war cats should go as well. MilborneOne (talk) 12:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment though these are defining periods for military aviation development. pre-WWI, WWI, interwar, WWII, Cold War, post-Cold War. Early history would be pre-WWI, WWI saw significant and quick development, the interwar period saw a lull, WWII again saw intense development, the Cold War saw another period of high development, and the post Cold War period saw reduced development. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 00:00, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment all aircraft articles are already categorised by decade according to type (like Category:Fighter aircraft 1940–1949) which is far more usefull in finding types by era than by conflict (some which are regional rather than global). MilborneOne (talk) 18:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- I support the use of broad periods. However, I am not sure that the Cold War is a useful period. I would prefer post-WWII, but WWII aircraft that remained in use for some years after the war are probably best excluded, so that the categories should be for Category:Military aircraft developed since 1945 etc. There is a problem defining the cold war, partly becasue it was cold: it did not start with a declaration of war and it did not end with an armistice or peace accord. I suppose it started with the Berlin airlift of 1948 and ended with the disintegration of USSR in 1991, but I can see a case for arguing for other dates. Peterkingiron (talk) 10:48, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete by defintion aircraft were not used in the Cold War, if they are actually being used they will be in some other war, except maybe U-2, so this is not really a good way to categorize equitment.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:46, 10 April 2013 (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:Jeans enthusiasts[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. Closing early per WP:SNOW. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Trivia. The subject of original research. How many actually reliable sources are we going to find that say someone is a jeans enthusiast? Elizium23 (talk) 00:25, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. "A list of celebrities and famous people who are always wearing or frequently spotted wearing jeans." Pretty much enough said, but in any case we don't categorize people by clothing commonly worn. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:45, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:19, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Silly and non-defining. Nymf talk to me 06:49, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this might work as a category for people who proactively try to promote the use of this item of clothing, but clearly fails in its current form.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:09, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - even those who promote jeans may not be personal enthusiasts. Star767 14:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I am not sure what would be worse. That this was a particularly bad April Fools joke, or that the creator actually thought this was a legitimate category. Resolute 01:48, 4 April 2013 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_April_2&oldid=1138397513"