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, without prejudice to recreating when there is appropriate content to categorize. -- Black Falcon(talk) 20:07, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article, which is not about Pakistani wine. Its wine made in Manchester by a British Pakistani. Rathfelder (talk) 20:52, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Categories not only help with navigation, they help with ensuring comprehensibility. The emptiness of this category reveals omission by bias. Pakistan has wines, Kalash wine for example, I am sure there are more missing articles. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:57, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for Now As an effectively empty category. No objection to recreating if we get some articles more closely related to the topic.RevelationDirect (talk) 17:12, 29 July 2018 (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. Timrollpickering 19:03, 28 July 2018 (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. Timrollpickering 19:04, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per the parent category, Category:Musicians by band, band members "categories should not be created when only one member has an article." StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 14:41, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as creator. This seems to have gotten through the "one member" rule. It should go.--Mike Selinker (talk) 14:51, 20 July 2018 (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. Timrollpickering 19:05, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: With all related articles in appropriate subject categories (albums and songs), this eponymous parent category is unnecessary per WP:OCEPON. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 14:38, 20 July 2018 (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: Only one item Hhkohh (talk) 13:30, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with a category on the championship series or with Asian Football Confederation. The creation of the article is perhaps not premature, but that of the category certainly is. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:06, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - I added a second article and eventually there will be more. I've no big objection to merging to Category:AFC U-23 Championship as the category truly is premature, but I also see little harm in retaining it for the next 1.5 years. -- Black Falcon(talk) 20:05, 1 August 2018 (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:Artsakhian building and structure stubs[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: Too small. Propose deleting category, and merging templates to Category:Artsakh stubs. Even with these additions, the parent category will still be underpopulated. Dawynn (talk) 12:23, 20 July 2018 (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. Timrollpickering 09:35, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (I created this category.) I know that categories such as this one are strongly discouraged, but I think the inclusion criteria are clear ("people whose fame or notability is directly related to their association with Malcolm X"). Every one of the people in the category is notable or became famous because of her or his association with Malcolm X. Louis Farrakhan, to whom Malcolm X was a mentor, doesn't belong in the category because his relationship with Malcolm X isn't what makes him notable or famous. Likewise, Ossie Davis, who delivered one of the most memorable eulogies in modern times at Malcolm X's funeral, doesn't belong in the category because his relationship with Malcolm X isn't what made him famous. But when photographer Don Hogan Charles died, every obituary mentioned his iconic photo of Malcolm X. — MShabazzTalk/Stalk 11:49, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Breitman is probably a stretch, but I believe Haley was a freelance writer who did interviews for Reader's Digest and Playboy before ghost-writing Malcolm X's autobiography brought him national attention. — MShabazzTalk/Stalk 20:35, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, the category contains a hodgepodge of people who have nothing in common with each other. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:25, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We already have a page containing (amongst other things) links to articles about people associated with Malcolm X. DexDor(talk) 11:29, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I had a neighbour who had a Malcom X poster. Wow, does this make us people associated with Malcom X? Place Clichy (talk) 16:31, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if you and your neighbor were notable, and your fame or notability was directly related to your association with Malcolm X. Any more stupid questions? — Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk 03:53, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete "associated with" and "related to" and "about" are poor characteristics upon which to categorize and they are inherently subjective and provide minimal use for anyone. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:07, 23 July 2018 (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:2nd millennium in the Austrian 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.
The result of the discussion was:Delete. Timrollpickering 09:35, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- The empire only existed in 19th and 20th centuries, so that there is no need to parent centuries in this way. How do we get the wholesale demolition of all millennium categories? Peterkingiron (talk) 17:19, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can we have a wider discussion somewhere about millenium categories? Rathfelder (talk) 19:17, 20 July 2018 (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/2018 August 9#Category:2020 AFC U-23 Championship. ℯxplicit 00:56, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
