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: This results from some duplication cleanup; some of the places filed here were sitting in both this and Category:Canada–United States border towns simultaneously, while some others were sitting in only one category or the other -- and the city vs. town distinction is not what was making the difference, as some towns were sitting in this category and some cities were not. To the extent that this actually constitutes a WP:DEFINING characteristic for the purposes of categorization at all, however, all Canadian communities that fit the criteria of being located on the border should be filed together, not just a random partial subset of them. That said, there is some arbitrariness being applied here, in that not every place that was sitting in either category is actually located on the border (some are located within what's described as "walking distance" from the border, with "walking distance" extending up to 30 km in some instances), and even some of the ones that are located on the border are not defined by the fact as there's no border crossing facility located there. So some purging may also be necessary here — but at the very least, there's no defining reason to segregate "cities" from "towns" in this context, especially given that a city vs. town segregation isn't even the way the categories were actually being used. Bearcat (talk) 23:24, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"Settlements" would be fine too, if that's what consensus would prefer — there's no Canadian-specific reason why it has to be "communities" per se, it's just that I had to pick a word that encompassed both towns and cities and that happens to be the first one that came to mind. Bearcat (talk) 15:57, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
comment The standard term used in WP for local population centers is 'populated places' which could/should be used here also. Hmains (talk) 16:09, 29 July 2017 (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. Insofar applicable I have added articles of this category to the tree of Category:Astrophysicists. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:16, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Does not follow general conventions - words and phrases does not exist in reliable sources/no such thing as a "Space theorists". Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 16:52, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete What is a space theorist? Mangoe (talk) 02:10, 31 July 2017 (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: Doesn't fit with existing cat scheme of artists/producers, and doesn't seem likely to attract any more members. —swpbT 16:26, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Creator's rationale: Shadab Rayeen is a mixing and mastering engineer, mixes and masters a major junk of Bollywood music after Eric Pillai, Category will is likely to attract many users in future AnoptimistixLet's Talk 02:01, 29 July 2017 (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: Unintended duplicate of an already existing page. CrossTemple Jay 14:45, 28 July 2017 (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:WP:NARROWCAT - unclear that there are, or will be in the future, any other articles for this category. —swpbT 14:44, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
impossible to discuss No articles currently reside in this category. Hmains (talk) 22:57, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've populated this category; it has ~10 members. Mangoe (talk) 20:54, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
keep part of category of adobe buildings which needs to be expanded. Hmains (talk) 03:02, 1 August 2017 (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. Participants agree that the article should be renamed first in order for this category to follow through. ℯxplicit 04:33, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Official name in English, the whole tree should probably be renamed. See this Ministry of Defense article as reference. effeietsanders 14:05, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong Venue Agree with Marcocapelle, above. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:57, 26 August 2017 (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 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. ℯxplicit 04:33, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:delete, their only content is Category:Neolithic Greece which hasn't been diffused by millennium. In addition we don't have millennium categories as early as this for any other countries. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:30, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cat-redirect to Category:Neolithic Greece, except 4th mill. which should be a dab-category for Category:Neolithic Greece and Category:Bronze Age Greece. Though there was (probably) no political unity and the northern boundary may be debatable, the geographic concept of Greece is well-known. I frequently support the removal of anachronistic categories, but we cannot do better than "Greece" here. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:44, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirecting to Neolithic Greece and Bronze Age Greece is a good idea.GreyShark (dibra) 12:10, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Agree that redirecting is useless in this case. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:40, 31 July 2017 (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:Agreements of the European Union with third countries[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 delete as nominated. ℯxplicit 04:33, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:merge per WP:SMALLCAT, there is no need to have three category layers for two articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:04, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge the first to Category:Treaties entered into by the European Union which appears to be much the same thing. As is becoming apparent over UK's Brexit, EU behaves like a sovereign state on behalf of its members and associates collectively negotiates external trade agreements, the rest of which are in my target. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:55, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that is an even better merge target indeed. I have adapted the nomination accordingly. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:22, 30 July 2017 (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.
Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 September 3#Category:Canadian border cities. ℯxplicit 04:33, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
