Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:List of galaxies

The Pointless duplicate of Category:Galaxies. - SimonP 03:05, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep, possibly rename. The current content of Category:Galaxies is articles about types of galaxies and galaxy-related topics, while Category:List of galaxies is a list of particular galaxies. Maybe a name like "Galaxy names" would be more appropriate, though. Mpolo 07:50, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * All the article in Category:List of galaxies can be found on the subpages of Category:Galaxies. - SimonP 08:00, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * That is incorrect. Not all galaxies listed can be found under other subcategories. For instance, the Starfish Galaxy. 132.205.45.110 16:54, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep but move to Category:Galaxy, seems a better name and fits the hierarchy: Galaxies>Galaxy>Star>Planet>Moon>etc. Pedant 11:18, 2004 Dec 12 (UTC)
 * KEEP because not all galaxies can be currently categorized under other subcategories of Galaxies. And it avoids cluttering up the Galaxies page with galaxies that aren't otherwise categorized.132.205.45.110
 * Should there be a list of galaxies where all galaxies appear, akin to the Category:Genera thing? The biology project has a totality of genus in genera, aside from being otherwise categorized. Note WikiPedia can categorize in multiple ways. And list of galaxies is an easy to find repository of galaxies, that doesn't need maintenance, unlike the list of galaxies article. 132.205.45.110 17:01, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * If they can't fit into a sub-category they belong in Category:Galaxies. - SimonP 17:29, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * Should Galaxies be cluttered up to make navigation less useful, with tons of galaxies that are potentially articles? 132.205.15.43 18:25, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete (or rename to "Lists of galaxies" and populate with lists). The way categorization normally works is that articles about X (whether individual Xs or type of X or whatever) go under "Category:Xs". "Category:List of X" is redundant, anyway. A category is already a type of list. If the problem is clutter, then there should be more sub-categories of Category:Galaxies. Perhaps a Category:Galaxies by type could be introduced, but this one has to go. It's just not how categories work. Category:Galaxy should probably be listed for deletion. Plurals are standard. (Is there a word that astrophysicists use for "the study of galaxies"?) -Aranel (" Sarah  ") 19:50, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: categories are not lists. All content in this category should be placed in list of galaxies and either Category:Galaxies or one of its subcategories.  -Sean Curtin 23:55, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * Perhaps this should be turned into a page instead of a category, like any number of other Wikipedia lists: List of sovereign states. A2Kafir 00:00, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Should either be a list or merged into Category:Galaxies. DCEdwards1966 00:46, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * How about a rename to Category:Galaxies by designation (or Category:Galaxies by name) ? 132.205.15.43 00:51, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Not sure. See the discussion at Category:Weapons by name, below.  JYolkowski 21:47, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * The discussion on Category:Genera was to keep that, and it's also a category as a no-maintenace list. 132.205.15.43 04:23, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Category talk:Stars
 * Delete, categories are not lists. As well, we should probably consider cleaning up Category:Galaxies, as most of the things in there are not galaxies.  JYolkowski 21:47, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * They seem to be galaxies, or agglomerations of galaxies, or information on galaxies 132.205.15.43 02:54, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)