Jump to content

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 July 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< July 6 July 8 >

July 7[edit]

Category:Volunteer Postmortem Eye Donation[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. Jafeluv (talk) 11:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Contains only one article at the time of nomination. Seems rather too over-precise to merit a separate category. SuperMarioMan 20:56, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. No reason to have such specialized titles when we do not have the multiple articles to justify them.John Pack Lambert (talk)
  • Merge per nom. Can't see how a separate category this specific is really an improvement. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:58, 8 July 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:SPIE journals[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: Rename. Jafeluv (talk) 11:03, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: To adhere to convention in rest of category tree. Randykitty (talk) 12:30, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I have no objection to the name change. This seems to fit with other categories such as Springer academic journals ; Oxford University Press academic journals ; Elsevier academic journals ; and so on. Also, as creator of this category I am thinking that this would be a non-controversial move. Also, I intend to populate this category with other SPIE journals very soon. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 12:40, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per nom. Regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 13:02, 8 July 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:Wikipedia requested photographs in Atlanta[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 action Nomination was not complete on the category page. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:29, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would someone mind merging Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Atlanta into Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Atlanta, Georgia (the latter category corresponds with the Wikipedian category)

Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 05:56, 7 July 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:Inspirational films[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. Jafeluv (talk) 11:04, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category has no stated criteria for inclusion and just saying "inspirational" without sources is arbitrary. Even with a single source or two, it could be disputable. Possibly WP:OC#ARBITRARY and WP:OC#SUBJECTIVE at play. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:02, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, all films could inspire someone. Tim! (talk) 06:51, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as non-defining. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 09:29, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Grande (talk) 13:51, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- inclusion (or not) is a matter of POV. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:28, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete what inspires one, bores another. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:51, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete don't know why I'm piling on here, but just wanted to say, this nomination inspires me. But the cat is POV. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 18:08, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete we lack an article on Inspirational film or any clear indications anywhere of what the criteria for inclusion is. Looking over the various meanings of "inspiration", I am not at all sure what the criteria for this is. One possibility is that this could be used for films that people later claimed "inspired" them to do notable things, but I do not think that was the intent. This is not a workable category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:30, 13 July 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:WikiProject Herschend Family Entertainment[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: Rename. If templates need updating can someone please take care of that? Vegaswikian (talk) 19:26, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: These categories no longer relate to WikiProjects, but rather task forces which are a part of the WikiProject Amusement Parks. A small discussion earlier this year had the consensus to move these categories to bring them into line with others both within and outside the WikiProject. Themeparkgc  Talk  00:54, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support per rationale --Dom497 (talk) 22:56, 8 July 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_July_7&oldid=1138398184"