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 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 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.
Nominator's rationale: I realize we have a lot of reality show judges categories... this particular one seems to be a textbook example of WP:PERFCAT and non-defining for the massive number of otherwise notable people who have appeared in such a role. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:53, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clicking through these, most seem like they were hired because they were famous, not famous because they were judges. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:45, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- clearly offends against perhormance by performer prohibition. I am less concerned about a contestants category as the people concerned may be notable for nothing else, but "celebrity contestants" ought to be excluded from that (or listified). Peterkingiron (talk) 16:37, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that was my thinking too, and why I only nominated the celebrity judges category. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:50, 24 November 2015 (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.
Nominator's rationale: redundant category, uses vague term "southwest" to describe precontact cultures spanning the US and Mexico. While the category says "periods" no archaeological periods are given, just four precontact cultural groups. Poorly worded, cultures are all categorized adequately elsewhere Yuchitown (talk) 04:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC)Yuchitown[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:People listed in Hummel's Eminent Chinese of the Ch'ing Period[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.
Nominator's rationale: I don't understand the point of this category. Eminent Chinese of the Ch'ing Period is just a biographical dictionary for the Qing dynasty (a.k.a. "Ch'ing Period"). It's not a primary source. Whether somebody is included or not included is completely arbitrary. It's kind of like Category:People listed in Encyclopædia Britannica, and I don't see anyone creating that category. (And while EB is continuously revised and updated, Hummel's book only has 1 version — from 1943). Timmyshin (talk) 04:45, 17 November 2015 (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.
