Category:Governorate-Generals of Russian Empire[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: Grammar, consistency with others. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:42, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Partial Support. No brainer on the definite article. But shouldn't it be Governorates-General? The operative word is governorate, not general. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:40, 15 September 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: Most of these are not actually curries. The category was a little confused, appearing to stem from a belief that "Anglo-Indian" means the same thing as "British Indian", which it doesn't of course, and included Indian dishes originating in Britain, which actually belonged only in Category:Indian cuisine in the United Kingdom (note that some articles belong in both categories). I think there is a place for this category, but not under this name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:37, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy per WP:C2D, facilitating concordance between a particular category's name and a related page's name, as the main article is Anglo-Indian cuisine. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:15, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to match main article. This is about dishes with an Indian influence introduced into Britain (and apparently US) before Indian restaurants proliferated. The cuisine of most Indian restaurant in UK seems to be derived from that of a Bangladeshi community, probably reflecting that if richer Indian Muslims. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:52, 17 September 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: Navigates too little content for an eponymous category. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:52, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for Now per WP:OCEPON. Only the main article exists right now. No objection to recreating if it ever gets up to 5 or so articles defined by the topic that don't belong in a subcategory. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:17, 16 September 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: Navigates too little content for an eponymous category. Note that the two subcats. are interlinked. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:52, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but Rename These may have been added post-nomination, but there are currently 7 articles and they all belong there. I suppose you could create a 2 article members cat, a 2 article movie cat, and a 2 article TV series cat but, even there, once you get up to 5 subcategories the parent category starts to serve a navigational function. The main article is Aly & AJ so the category should be renamed to match. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:27, 16 September 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: Navigates too little content for an eponymous category. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:51, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Falls short of my cutoff of 5 articles for WP:SMALLCAT and, even if it grows, it's really a "members" category. RevelationDirect (talk) 10:01, 16 September 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: Navigates too little content for an eponymous category. Note that the two subcats. are interlinked. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:51, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep With tours, discography, and awards pages (in addition to the albums and songs subcats), precedent suggests this meets minimal standards for an eponymous category. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 16:29, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep You could push two articles down to a tour subcategory but that still leaves 5 which is my personal cutoff for WP:SMALLCAT. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:32, 16 September 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. -- Black Falcon(talk) 03:59, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Emir of Wikipedia: I don't understand what you're asking. That category is fine--there should be a category for their albums. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:20, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It is not a category for albums though, but a single album. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:22, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Emir of Wikipedia: Hi Emir, WP:SMALLCAT makes an exception for having small articles of works by artist. Also, WP:OCEPON encourages pushing down works by artist into a subcategory to avoid creating categories named after people/groups based solely on albums, etc. So, while they're both one article, one meets the guidelines but one doesn't. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:39, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The albums category is recommended at MOS:ALBUM for all music acts even if they've released one album as the exception to WP:SMALLCAT. The eponymous category is very general and there is not enough content to justify it per WP:OCEPON. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 20:42, 15 September 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: /Upmerge to both parents. No need for a category for one specific tribute album. It would be worth creating one analogous to Category:Bob Dylan tribute albums if there were, say, nine entries but one is needless. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:48, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – firstly, 'Alabama (band) tribute album' is a defining characteristic of an Alabama (band) tribute album. Secondly, Category:Tribute albums is not useful as a list as one cannot usually tell from the title to whom the tribute might be. For example My Old Man (album) would be more usefully categorised under Category:Steve Goodman tribute albums rather than being lost in a list. Oculi (talk) 14:09, 14 September 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. Listification has already been done, the main article includes links to the video games. (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 11:53, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Navigates too little content for an eponymous category. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. But if the consensus is to delete the category, then listify their accomplishments instead. - Gilgamesh (talk) 08:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for Different Reasons Having video games categorized by the band that did the music seems WP:NONDEFINING to me, unless it was a music focused game. No objection to listifying this within the main article though. RevelationDirect (talk) 10:10, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per RevDir. --Izno (talk) 16:52, 19 September 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: Navigates too little content for an eponymous category. Note that the two subcats. are interlinked. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:OCEPON and WP:SMALLCAT. Even if the article count grows, this is likely to be a band "members" category and not an eponymous one. RevelationDirect (talk) 10:07, 16 September 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. -- Black Falcon(talk) 04:00, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Navigates too little content for an eponymous category. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:46, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:OCEPON. Only consists of the main article and a discography and isn't aiding navigation. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:53, 16 September 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: Navigates too little content for an eponymous category. Note that the two subcats. are interlinked. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:45, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete My arbitrary cutoff form WP:SMALLCAT is 5 articles and this one has 3. Even if it grows, it is likely to be a "members" category.RevelationDirect (talk) 09:52, 16 September 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: Navigates too little content for an eponymous category. Note that the two subcats. are interlinked. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:43, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Only 3 articles and my cutoff is 5 for WP:SMALLCAT. Even if it grows, it really is a "members" category. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:57, 16 September 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.
Delete A very unnecessary level of categorization per WP:OCEPON and numerous CfD precedent. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 16:31, 14 September 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:keep, without prejudice to more focused nominations to upmerge specific (groups of) categories. -- Black Falcon(talk) 00:45, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Perfect example of a trivial characteristic in virtually all examples. The concept of a power trio or a string quartet is certainly of value but the fact that R.E.M. and the Kronos Quartet have the same amount of members at some point in their existence is not defining or worth grouping them together. How would anyone use this for navigation? We can Listify the concept articles (e.g. brass quintet or barbershop quartet) but let's delete the actual categories containing multitudinous rock bands that just happen to have a bassist, drummer, guitarist, and singer. (Note that the last time I nominated this eight years ago, it was no consensus with a suggestion to renominate.) ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:29, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – A quick scan of the list above leaves me convinced that categories for "Fooian string quartets", "<instrument> quintets", and most of the higher-numbered ensembles are highly useful. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:20, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
keep, for the most part I agree with the larger idea that number isn't significant, but we have articles on string quartet, barbershop quartet, wind quintet, and so forth; these are all recognized genres, and the groups which specialize in performing them are likewise categorizable. Come back with a nomination which deals with this and we can talk. Mangoe (talk) 19:32, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The reference to WP:TRIVIA in the nomination is erroneous as that has nothing to do with categories. Andrew D. (talk) 21:05, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If defining a group by its number of members is trivial and ridiculous, then why is it named the Kronos quartet? Hyacinth (talk) 21:13, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – the advice at the previous cfd was "No Consensus, advise smaller, more tightly focused renominations for these categories". This is larger and less focused. Oculi (talk) 21:15, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - While there might well be a case for deleting some of these, as others have commented this is by no means clear for all of them and I think they need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. Dunarc (talk) 18:56, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/Favor Upmerging Any Category with < 5 articles Generally, I favor this tree as defining. I would favor cleaning up some of the nationality intersection or other subcategories that are currently too small to aid navigation. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:47, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- There may be a few to be eliminated (by upmerge) because they are not and will not be populated with 5 or more articles, but we have a classification by number of players/musical genre/nationality. In some genres, the number of players may be trivial, but in classical music it is important, since the musicians are reproducing music composed by others. Not sure about numbers elsewhere. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:57, 17 September 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:procedural close. Category does no longer exist. (non-admin closure) Marcocapelle (talk) 10:57, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is entirely redundant to the parent category. Why does this even exist? Separated from my other nomination to point out how the problems with it are different. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:25, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as not a defining category. --Izno (talk) 11:40, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural Close The creator has deleted the category, presumably after realizing it was a duplicate category. Not our normal process but this was pretty clear cut. RevelationDirect (talk) 09:44, 16 September 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 October 2#Category:Alabama (band) tribute albums. -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:08, 2 October 2017 (UTC)