Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 October 26



Category:First ladies that posed nude

 * 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. —  ξ xplicit  06:31, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * first ladies that posed nude


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete. Ok. We don't categorize people who have posed nude—it's overcategorization of performer by performance, essentially. Therefore there is no reason to categorize by intersection of occupation and having posed nude. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Created solely for Carla Bruni, who incidentally wasn't the First Lady of France when she modeled nude; in that sense there aren't even any applicable members of this category. And it's exceedingly trivial, etc...  The category's addition was reverted within a day as no one would take it seriously.  As it's empty, it can just be speedied within four days (if not before then).  postdlf (talk) 16:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank heavens this can't be extended to any U.S. first ladies. Remember the special Nancy Reagan Playboy edition from 1987? Must ... purge ... mental image ... Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Postdlf. Anti-Nationalist (talk) 16:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The French don't use "First Lady", or any equivalent, anyway. Johnbod (talk) 16:50, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as trivial intersection, overcategorisation, etc. Debresser (talk) 21:24, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete totally trivial - Wikigi | talk to me | 09:04, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete trivial characteristic, almost an attack category. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:07, 29 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Bay class landing ship dock ships

 * 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: Rename Category:Bay class landing ship dock ships to Category:Bay class landing ship docks.  --  X damr  talk 20:11, 7 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:Bay class landing ship dock ships to Category:Bay class landing ship docks
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename to match main article, Bay class landing ship dock. I would also be fine with renaming the article to match the class, but don't know enough about these ships to make a determination one way or the other. — Bellhalla (talk) 22:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Planetary systems

 * 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.  --  X damr  talk 20:12, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Propose renaming All stars with planets listed in Category:Planetary systems and all stars with hypothetical planets listed in Category:Hypothetical planetary systems should be moved to Category:Stars with planets and Category:Stars with hypothetical planets, respectively. BlueEarth (talk | contribs) 21:24, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments: The main article in this category is currently at planetary system. However, the articles in this category mostly deal primarily with the star itself, not the associated planetary system (outside our Solar System, it is not worthwhile to distinguish the two). Neither the current category nor the proposed rename seems illogical to me, so I would be fine with either, but I advise to keep for stability unless there are convincing arguments that renaming causes a substantial improvement in the quality of categorization. Ucucha 21:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose This name allows us to categorize planetary system articles that are not star articles, as well as stars with planets that don't have separate planetary system articles. 70.29.209.91 (talk) 03:37, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 1st-- can you name any planetary system articles that are not star articles-- other than our own Solar System? 2nd-- even if we did have planetary system articles of a number like the number of stars with planets articles (and we don't at all)-- we could still put them both in Category:Planetary systems. Putting planetary system articles in Category:Stars with planets would be just as accurate as putting stars with planets articles in Category:Planetary systems. Since most-- if not all-- of these articles are stars with planets articles-- the Category:Stars with planets is much more accurate. User talk:CarlaudeUser talk:Carlaude 01:23, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments: Category:Stars with planets seems like systems with more than one planet-- and that is not what is covered by the category. I am not sure if there is a better name or not. User talk:CarlaudeUser talk:Carlaude 01:51, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Stars with planets is not always a system with more than one planets. This category will contain stars with just one planet. The planetary system category is all star articles with planets and none to planet articles, that's a bit strange. Stars are not planetary systems, but a central member of the planetary systems. Planetary systems are the systems of planets, moons, circumstellar disks, asteroids, comets, and other objects that orbit the star. So it would be better to rename category in all star articles with planets to stars with planets to have more clarification. After renaming it, we could still keep the category:Planetary systems to keep these as articles and categories about circumstellar disks, astrodynamics of planetary systems, lists of extrasolar planets, solar system, and others. BlueEarth (talk | contribs) 19:11, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it is clear what the category does and will contain.
 * My point is that normally you would call that Category:Stars with one or more planets or Category:Stars with (a) planet(s). The proposed name does not match the category contents very well when most of these are stars with only one planet. User talk:CarlaudeUser talk:Carlaude 21:24, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:West Midlands

 * 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: rename. —  ξ xplicit  06:51, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:West Midlands to Category:West Midlands (county)
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. To avoid confusion with Category:West Midlands (region) and to follow the main article West Midlands (county). MRSC (talk) 20:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom. Mayumashu (talk) 22:29, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:58, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * REname to avoid ambiguity. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:06, 29 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:AGV

 * 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 Category:AGV to Category:High-speed trains.  --  X damr  talk 20:13, 7 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:AGV to Category:Automotrice à grande vitesse
 * Nominator's rationale: To expand and match parent article, automotrice à grande vitesse, as AGV is ambiguous. Alternatively, can be merged into Category:High-speed trains as a small, eponymous category. — ξ xplicit  20:35, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * neutral to renaming No issues with the rename - but should Category:TGV be renamed too. Please note that this type of train is just starting being produced - so the category may be expected to expand in the future as per Cat:TGV
 * As a note the usage AGV is common in reportage of the new vehicle eg http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=agv+rail&btnG=Search&meta=&aq=f&oq= both by the manufacturer, and by railway periodicals etc so the name can be expected to become as well known as TGV (?crystalball..).Shortfatlad (talk) 20:43, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * TGV should not be renamed as an expansion, since it's the common name in English, and English isn't French, so using the french expansion makes no sense in English for TGV. As for AGV... it's new... Category:AGV (high speed train) works. 70.29.209.91 (talk) 03:40, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * AGV seems to be entering common usage, I would expect it to become common usage as with TGV, second category suggestion seems sensible, future proof and non confusing.Shortfatlad (talk) 23:33, 31 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom if kept. AGV is ambiguous.  As a single entry category, with unknown growth potential, we should consider a merge to Category:High-speed trains for now. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Texas political scandals

 * 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: rename. —  ξ xplicit  06:51, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Texas political scandals to Category:Political scandals in Texas
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. In analogy with the parent category and sister categories. LarRan (talk) 19:44, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom; it better clarifies that these are scandals that occurred within Texas, rather than merely involving Texans or impacting Texas. Postdlf (talk) 20:05, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Rename per nominator and Postdlf. Debresser (talk) 21:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Rio Tinto Subsidiaries

 * 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: rename. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:54, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Rio Tinto Subsidiaries to Category:Rio Tinto subsidiaries
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. Incorrect capitalization. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 19:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. This could have been done as a speedy rename. LarRan (talk) 14:36, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Speedy Debresser (talk) 21:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Rename Peterkingiron (talk) 20:04, 29 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Parliamentary constituencies in the West Midlands

 * 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: rename. —  ξ xplicit  06:51, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming
 * Category:Parliamentary constituencies in the West Midlands to Category:Parliamentary constituencies in the West Midlands (region)
 * Category:Future parliamentary constituencies in the West Midlands to Category:Future parliamentary constituencies in the West Midlands (region)
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. To disambiguate between the county and the region. This category applies to the region. MRSC (talk) 17:10, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:59, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom to clarify that this is not merely about West Midlands (county), which continues to be used for postal and other purposes, though the County Council was abolished in the 1980s. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:03, 29 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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.

China Open

 * 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: rename/merge as nominated. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:China Open to Category:China Open (tennis)
 * Propose merging Category:2009 China Open to Category:China Open (tennis)
 * Nominator's rationale: Parent cat should be renamed to disambiguate from Category:China Open (badminton) and Category:China Open (snooker). The other category should be upmerged as it only contains 5 articles. Previous such categories have been upmerged, see discussion. Tassedethe (talk) 16:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Support Rename / Merge to match title of parent article. Alansohn (talk) 19:13, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Rename / Merge to match article China Open (tennis). Consider how the articles in Category:China Open are best sorted (by year I would suggest, so the 2009 articles are collected together). Occuli (talk) 20:31, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Rename  per nominator. Debresser (talk) 21:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Kashmiri cuisine

 * 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 to Category:Kashmiri cuisine. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:56, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Suggest merging Category:Kashmiri cuisine to Category:Azad Kashmiri cuisine
 * Nominator's rationale: Same cuisine type with two different names. Maybe the longer name should be merged into the shorter name? Enric Naval (talk) 16:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Reverse Merge as parent article exists for Kashmiri cuisine, but no article exists for the proposed merge target (Azad Kashmiri cuisine). Alansohn (talk) 19:15, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Reverse Merge Parent Article exists for Kashmiri cuisine because Azad Kashmir is only a small part of the valley. Whole region is known as Kashmir. Instead Category:Azad Kashmiri cuisine should be merged in Category:Kashmiri cuisine.Oniongas (talk) 11:54, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Reverse merge per nominator's second suggestion. Debresser (talk) 21:20, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Reverse merge (if we need a change at all) -- As I understand it Azad Kashmir is what is on the Pakistani side of the 1948 ceasefire line, whereas the rest of Kashmir is (against the wishes of many of its Muslim inhabitants) part of India. If these categories were to remain distinct, it would be necessary to establish that theri cuisine has significnatly diverged in the past 60 years of political separation.  Peterkingiron (talk) 20:00, 29 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Reptiles of Michigan
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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 Category:Reptiles of Michigan to Category:Reptiles of the United States.  --  X damr  talk 20:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Suggest merging Category:Reptiles of Michigan to Category:Reptiles of the United States
 * Nominator's rationale: Upmerge, OCAT. This is the only U.S. state-specific reptile category.  As with all the other Michigan-specific fauna categories that have been (without exception) merged and deleted recently, none of the included species are endemic to Michigan, but instead range more widely through the United States; many are even distributed throughout North and South America.  Categorizing widely-distributed species by such narrow, subnational slivers of species distribution would impose upon them hundreds (if not thousands) of categories for areas their articles don't even bother to mention.  Indeed, the vast majority of the included articles do not even mention Michigan.  Postdlf (talk) 15:44, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Upmerge per nominator and recent precedent. Debresser (talk) 21:20, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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.

Ships of the Dutch Republic
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename. —  ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  06:51, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming
 * Category:Ships of the United Provinces to Category:Ships of the Dutch Republic
 * Category:Age of Sail ships of the United Provinces to Category:Age of Sail ships of the Dutch Republic
 * Category:Age of Sail merchant ships of the United Provinces to Category:Age of Sail merchant ships of the Dutch Republic
 * Category:Merchant ships of the United Provinces to Category:Merchant ships of the Dutch Republic
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename United Provinces is ambiguous; These ships are all from the predecessor of the Netherlands, which is at Dutch Republic. — Bellhalla (talk) 15:18, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Support Renames to match title of parent article. Alansohn (talk) 19:16, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Rename all per nominator. Debresser (talk) 21:19, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Trivandrum
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:00, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Propose renaming:
 * Category:Trivandrum to Category:Thiruvananthapuram
 * Category:Companies in Trivandrum to Category:Companies in Thiruvananthapuram Category:Companies based in Thiruvananthapuram
 * Category:Economy of Trivandrum to Category:Economy of Thiruvananthapuram
 * Category:Education in Trivandrum to Category:Education in Thiruvananthapuram
 * Category:Geography of Trivandrum to Category:Geography of Thiruvananthapuram
 * Category:Government of Trivandrum to Category:Government of Thiruvananthapuram
 * Category:History of Trivandrum to Category:History of Thiruvananthapuram
 * Category:Organisations based in Trivandrum to Category:Organisations based in Thiruvananthapuram
 * Category:Trivandrum culture to Category:Thiruvananthapuram culture


 * Nominator's rationale: In followup to Categories for discussion/Log/2009 October 19, rename categories based on main article for topic. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:32, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Support Renames to match title of parent article. Alansohn (talk) 19:17, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Rename all per nom.-- choster 22:47, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Supporting Rename: Although Trivandrum is still widely used for the city, the official name is Thiruvananthapuram. Hence, as per norm, rename can be supported. Cheers, -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me..) 06:26, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Low-carbon transport
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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:  at Categories for discussion/Log/2009 November 16.  postdlf (talk) 22:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Suggest merging Category:Low-carbon transport to Category:Electric vehicles
 * Nominator's rationale: Downmerge. So far, there is no description of the category nor any examples not from the targetted subcategory. — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 10:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment We have Category:Low-carbon economy, and Low-carbon economy includes a section on "Transportation Services." It does not, however, provide any canonical definition of "low-carbon," and the definitions it does provide are highly subjective and otherwise problematic.- choster 18:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. :-o I should have seen that.  I've now attached it to Category:Low-carbon economy, and created a potentially appropriate catmain.  I still think the category should be merged somewhere, though.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 19:34, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I would have supported deletion but held out in case a subject matter expert could cite some sort of international standard, comparable to Category:LEED certified buildings. Of course, where I live, almost all electricity is coal-fired, so electric vehicles do not in fact contribute to lowering carbon emissions.- choster 22:43, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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.

Lewiston Maineiacs
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename. —  ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  06:51, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Lewiston MAINEiacs alumni to Category:Lewiston Maineiacs alumni
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match the article (Lewiston Maineiacs) and per WP:MOSTM. RandySavageFTW (talk) 10:02, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Rename per nominator. Debresser (talk) 21:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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.

Confederate States
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename all to "Confederate States" format (i.e., Category:Military equipment of the Confederate States not being changed). Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:59, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Confederate Army divisions to Category:Confederate States Army divisions
 * Propose renaming Category:Confederate Army generals to Category:Confederate States Army generals
 * Propose renaming Category:Confederate Army officers to Category:Confederate States Army officers
 * Propose renaming Category:Confederate Army soldiers to Category:Confederate States Army soldiers
 * Propose renaming Category:Confederate Navy admirals to Category:Confederate States Navy admirals
 * Propose renaming Category:Confederate Navy captains to Category:Confederate States Navy captains
 * Propose renaming Category:Confederate Navy commanders to Category:Confederate States Navy commanders
 * Propose renaming Category:Confederate Navy officers to Category:Confederate States Navy officers
 * Propose renaming Category:Military equipment of the Confederate States to Category:Military equipment of the Confederate States of America
 * Propose renaming Category:Weapons of the Confederacy to Category:Weapons of the Confederate States of America
 * Propose renaming Category:Confederate field artillery to Category:Confederate States of America field artillery
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match parent categories Category:Confederate States Army, Category:Confederate States Navy and Category:Confederate States of America. Tassedethe (talk) 09:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Support all BusterD (talk) 10:43, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Renames to match titles of parent articles. Alansohn (talk) 19:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Support renames of most -- the first eight.
 * We have Category:Military equipment of the United States, not Category:Military equipment of the United States of America
 * Why not have Category:Military equipment of the Confederate States instead of Category:Military equipment of the Confederate States of America?
 * Rename its main subcat from Category:Weapons of the Confederacy to Category:Weapons of the Confederate States
 * Rename its sub-subcat from Category:Confederate field artillery to Category:American Civil War field artillery (or Delete -- it has one item) Field artillery is normally done by era or war, not my nation.


 * Question Why the inconsistency? All use "Confederate States", but two of them use "Confederate States of America". If this inconsistency will persist, I oppose a rename, till such time as somebody will come up with a consistent proposal. Debresser (talk) 21:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Unattached football (soccer) players
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: speedy delete G4; re-creation of previously discussed and deleted material. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:03, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * unattached football (soccer) players


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete. Previous Category:Unattached footballers listified after a discussion. The resulting list was then deleted after another discussion. To quote Chris Cunningham:"Completely impractical - "unattached" is just a euphemism for "unemployed", and when one considers semi-pro players as well the scope basically extends to every able-bodied man between 16 and 45 who's ever played for a club.". Tassedethe (talk) 09:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and previous discussions. Declan Clam (talk) 17:46, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Government in Leeds
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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:  at Categories for discussion/Log/2009 November 16.  postdlf (talk) 22:54, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Government in Leeds to Category:Politics of Leeds
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. Standardise with parent Category:Politics of West Yorkshire and others. MRSC (talk) 08:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Should Category:Government in Bradford and Category:Government in Wakefield be renamed in a similar way as well? -- WOSlinker (talk) 00:47, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose.  is a subcat of, which is part of the tree parented under  ... and it should co-exist with a separate , parented under  9which includes elections, parliamentary constituencies, etc).
 * I stumbled on this renaming proposal whilst sorting out the politics and govt categories for Yorkshire, having already created a Category:Politics of Leeds, and partially depopulated the nominated category. I wouldn't have proceeded had I spotted the CFR underway, but what I have done is to create the appropriate Politics of X categories, and moved out of the Government of X categories the article which don't relate to local government.
 * To avoid further confusion, there may be a case for renaming the subcats of to "local government" rather than just "government", but if so I suggest that this should be done as a group nomination rather than an ad-hoc basis. There are squillions of other similar categories such as, ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  etc ... all of which deal solely with local govt, all of which are about local rather than national govt, and should be named accordingly. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:24, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:JLA images
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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.  postdlf (talk) 22:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:JLA images to Category:Justice League images
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per main cat. Also, this isn't strictly about JLA images, but generally about Justice League-related images. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:57, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose - The category is a "behind the scenes" cat (files only) and was inteded to be a short and inclusive as possible. The material covered is generally lumped under "JLA" regardless of coming from sources titled JLA, Justice League of America, Justice League, Justice League Europe, etc. - J Greb (talk) 12:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose per J Greb, not a "customer facing" category. Hiding T 12:45, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Hang Lung
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: Rename Category:Hang Lung to Category:Hang Lung Group.  --  X damr  talk 20:16, 7 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Propose renaming Category:Hang Lung to Category:Hang Lung Group
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match the main article. Vegaswikian1 (talk) 07:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:CITIC
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename. —  ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  06:51, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:CITIC to Category:CITIC Group
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match main article. Vegaswikian1 (talk) 07:25, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Support Rename to match title of parent article. Alansohn (talk) 19:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:ICMLPO (Unity and Struggle)
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:ICMLPO (Unity and Struggle) to Category:International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organizations (Unity & Struggle)
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per main article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:21, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:MTR Corporation Limited
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename. —  ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  20:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:MTR Corporation Limited to Category:MTR Corporation
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match the main article, MTR Corporation, which is named per the mos. Vegaswikian1 (talk) 07:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Kerry Group
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: withdrawn by nominator. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:00, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Kerry Group to Category:Kerry Properties
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. To match what appears to be the main article Kerry Properties. Vegaswikian1 (talk) 06:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. Kerry Group and Kerry Properties are completely different articles. There might be some intermingling within the category. — ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  20:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Can I suggest that we still do the rename and then allow the recreation of Category:Kerry Group for any that would belong there if it is in fact needed. This would allow the bots to do most of the work and clear up any confusion caused by the current naming and use.  In the meantime I may do the split manually, but be aware this could have the effect of emptying the category. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:11, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I suggest that this be closed as withdrawn. I have split out the two companie's articles, so Category:Kerry Group only has things related to the Kerry Group. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Hopewell
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename. —  ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  20:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Hopewell to Category:Hopewell Holdings
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. Hopewell is totally ambiguous and the main article appears to be Hopewell Holdings. Vegaswikian1 (talk) 06:50, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Fosun Group
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: RENAME.  postdlf (talk) 22:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Fosun Group to Category:Fosun International
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. The correct name of the company appears to be Fosun International Limited, but by naming convention it should be Fosun International and the category should be so named. Vegaswikian1 (talk) 06:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Existense
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#eeeeee; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more user 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. postdlf (talk) 23:00, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Suggest merging Category:Existense to Category:Existentialist Wikipedians
 * Nominator's rationale: Unclear inclusion criteria, seems to serve the same purpose as Category:Existentialist Wikipedians. — ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  06:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Cook Islands rugby league players
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename. —  ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  20:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * '''Administrative nomination: moved from speedy renaming section.
 * Copied from speedy renaming section:
 * Category:Cook Islands rugby league players to Category:Cook Island rugby league players #1, to match (trust me on this one) — Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:03, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Same as the one above. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  23:33, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * See my comments above. Davshul (talk) 10:13, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * End of copied material.


 * Comment (nominator). I still think that this is categorization by nationality, not categorization by national team. There is no mention in many of the included articles in that the player played for the C.I. national team. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:00, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree Rename per nom. - Davshul (talk) 05:34, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Same here. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  23:19, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Cook Islands rugby union footballers
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename. —  ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  20:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * '''Administrative nomination: moved from speedy renaming section.
 * Copied from speedy renaming section:
 * Category:Cook Islands rugby union footballers to Category:Cook Island rugby union footballers #1, to match (trust me on this one) — Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:03, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Mmmmm. Not sure. Though you're right that the adjectival form is "Cook Island", this may be for players for the national team, in which case we use the noun (e.g., ). If it's just for Cook Islanders, irrespective of whether they've represented their country, then support. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  23:33, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Same as above, in addition Grutness's own reservation. Davshul (talk) 10:13, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * End of copied material.


 * Comment (nominator). I still think that this is categorization by nationality, not categorization by national team. There is no mention in Ryan Nicholas that he played for the C.I. national team. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:56, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree Rename per nom. - Davshul (talk) 05:34, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Same here. I must say taht it does look like this is simply for Cook Islanders, not for national team members (which should, in any case, be in if such is the case. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  23:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:New Zealanders of Cook Islands descent
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: Rename. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:47, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Administrative nomination. Moved from speedy rename section.
 * Copied from speedy rename section:
 * Category:New Zealanders of Cook Islands descent to Category:New Zealanders of Cook Island descent #1 (trust me on this one) — Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:06, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Whilst I note that in an edit to the Cook Island disambiguation page Grutness added some time ago that "Cook Island is the adjectival demonym" for Cook Islands, I could not find an authoritative reference for this (nor is there mention of it in the Cook Islands article) and, indeed, on the official government website of the Cook Islands, the adjectival term used is always "Cook Islands". Furthermore, there is always the possibility of confussion between the "Cook Islands" and one of the islands known as "Cook Island" if the "singular" term is used. In addition, the Wiki article on the local language is entitled "Cook Islands Maori" and all other Cook Islands articles (e.g. including those on the national sports teams) use the plural. Accordingly, it would appear preferable not to rename. Davshul (talk) 10:13, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The language is officially Cook Islands Maori and the government is officially the Cook Islands Government (with its divisions consistently named with that), and the national sports teams use the same rule as used for other international sports teams. The individual people, however, are Cook Island people, and the term "Cook Island" is the most widely used adjectival demonym. For official sources, will the New Zealand Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs do? Or the Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand? If not, how about UNICEF? Or - to trump those - The Cook Islands Government, which uses the term "Cook Island" as a demonym many times throughout its website.Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  22:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I asked users to trust me. Where's the trust? There is no trust .... Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:51, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * End of copied material.


 * Comment (nominator). I still agree with Grutness; "Cook Island foo" is correct. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom - In light of the discussion, I now agree that "Cook Island" would appear to be the correct term. Davshul (talk) 16:32, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I always thought the (s) was added in relation to there being more than one island as there are 15 islands not just one.But I also agree with the other.Im more worried about someone posting people who dont belong under that category,namely Sonny Bill Williams,Wiki,Asotasi and Jerry Collins. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toymit (talk • contribs)
 * Yes, usage is not always informed by logic. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:44, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Query regarding usage. Whilst I note, as mentioned above, that the language is "Cook Islands Maori", what is the correct term for the ethnic group? Close to the beginning of the article Cook Islands, the term used is "Cook Island Maori", but the link is to "Cook Islands Maori". Davshul (talk) 07:00, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure the ethnicity is "Cook Island Maori". There is a category for people at . Grutness would probably know how to reference this. I'm pretty sure that's the answer, but I don't know what to point you to as evidence. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Country songs
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:42, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Country songs to Category:Country music songs
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. Per main category/article. Also: Category:American country songs, Category:Canadian country songs, Category:German country songs (!), and Category:Swedish country songs. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Musical groups by numbers
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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, advise smaller, more tightly focused renominations for these categories.  --  X damr  talk 14:42, 22 November 2009 (UTC)


 * musical groups by numbers


 * Nominator's rationale: Delete. I am doubtful that this is a defining characteristic of a musical group and with many groups (e.g. Grateful Dead or Hawkwind) they would occupy any one of these subcategories at different points in their career. Alternative: we may want to keep this parent category and only delete the following subcategories:

—Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Category:Musical duos
 * Category:Classical piano duos
 * Category:Country music duos
 * Category:Electronic music duos
 * Category:Reggaetón duos
 * Category:Rock music duos
 * Category:Sibling musical duos
 * Category:Musical trios
 * Category:Classical music trios
 * Category:Sibling musical trios
 * Category:Vocal trios
 * Category:Musical quartets
 * Category:Musical quintets
 * Category:Musical sextets
 * Category:Musical septets
 * Category:Musical octets
 * Category:Musical nonets


 * Keep Category:Classical piano duos and Category:Classical music trios and all other categories (not yet listed) that fall under the Category:Chamber music groups. Music for classical musical instrments is always written for a certain number of players to play together, such as solos, quartets, duos, orchestra. Keep Category:Brass quintets also. Keep Category:Vocal trios and Category:Vocal quartets or Merge into Category:Vocal ensembles. Keep Category:Sibling musical duos and Category:Sibling musical trios or Merge into Category:Family musical groups. Delete the rest listed above. User talk:CarlaudeUser talk:Carlaude 09:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete the quartet, quintet, sextet, septet, octet, and nonet categories, which are really trying too hard. Pointless category clutter.  Keep all of the duo categories, as that is by far a more defining feature than having six or seven or whatever members.  Indifferent regarding the trio categories.  Postdlf (talk) 16:23, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep any parent left with sub-cats, & all classical & brass categories, per Carlaude. Probably keep sibling categories, and maybe duos and trios. Weak delete for popular music, Rock etc "quartets" and above. There have been previous discussions here, I'm sure. Does anyone have links? Johnbod (talk) 17:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep all Very defining. see Trio Hellenique], Aviv String Quartet, and many others. Debresser (talk) 21:08, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete all except the duo categories per Postdlf. Most groups that aren't duos change numbers over time, so categorizing by number will be very difficult. Also, I should point out that Category:Sibling trios was deleted, so Category:Sibling musical trios should go as well. renamed, and it seems weird to me to have sibling musical trios but not "sibling trios" proper — it'd be like having "American country singers" but not "American singers." Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:13, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No TenPoundHammer-- there was no deletion of Category:Sibling trios per se. Read the CfD. The action was just a rename of Category:Sibling trios to the current Category:Sibling musical trios. If anything, this would be consensus to keep. User talk:CarlaudeUser talk:Carlaude 00:00, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Amended. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't follow. What sort on non-musical Category:Sibling trios do you have in mind? Sibling comedy trios? The CfD was not about dis-allowing non-musical sibling trios. It was just a just a name change for a category that was already about musical sibling trios. User talk:CarlaudeUser talk:Carlaude 01:08, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Any notable set of three siblings, really. There are non-musical ones. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 05:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete 4–9; keep the duos per Postdlf. I'd say probably delete the trios one too. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:24, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Support the proposal of user:Carlaude. Additionally we need categories for String Quartets and Piano Quartets.  Such classical musical groups tend to last a long time and have prominence.  If may be that other quartets and (possibly) quintets need splitting by musical type and keeping, but the fact that a rock, or other pop group has four members is hardly notable.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:55, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep duos, trios, quartets, possibly quintets, as very defining (see cat Brass quintets for example), and those groups for which this is not defining simply don't need to go in them . Indifferent on higher ones, but if they are deleted, remember to merge properly to parent cats and don't simply obliterate them. • Anakin (talk) 11:57, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete quartets through nonents as overcategorization. Delete Parent and merge move the musical duos and trios categories to Category:Musical groups. --Wolfer68 (talk) 18:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Prehistoric Cingulates
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: Rename - could have been speedy under criterion 2. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:00, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Prehistoric Cingulates to Category:Prehistoric cingulates
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. Capitalization error. I believe it might actually be preferable to rename to Category:Prehistoric Cingulata instead, since "cingulate" is not really a common name, but that may deserve a little more discussion. Ucucha 00:44, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Speedy rename as completely uncontroversial. Debresser (talk) 21:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Eozapus
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:54, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Suggest merging Category:Eozapus to Category:Dipodidae
 * Nominator's rationale: Merge into Category:Dipodidae. Should have been listed and merged under Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_October_16, but I forgot to add it to the list. Ucucha 00:31, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge per nom and prior discussion. --Aranae (talk) 02:05, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Ctenodactylidae
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename. Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:55, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Ctenodactylidae to Category:Gundis
 * Nominator's rationale: Rename. "Gundis" is used in the main article, and it is an unambiguous and widely used common name. Ucucha 00:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Rename per nom and prior moves of this nature. --Aranae (talk) 02:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:Surrogate albums
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: rename. Author created new category Category:Surrogate (band) albums and requested deletion of Category:Surrogate albums (non-admin closure). —  ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  02:27, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:Surrogate albums to Category:Surrogate (band) albums
 * Nominator's rationale: To disambiguate and match parent article, Surrogate (band). — ξ <sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit  00:02, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. A newbie oversight, sorry. Weebee777 (talk) 01:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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:African American Cemeteries
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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: Rename. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:45, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Propose renaming Category:African American Cemeteries to Category:African American cemeteries
 * Nominator's rationale: Administrative nomination. Moved from speedy rename section due to comments below. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:02, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Copied from speedy rename section:
 * Category:African American Cemeteries to Category:African American cemeteries #2 — Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:02, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Not convinced we need this category - it's pretty vaguely defined (given that in some parts of the US the population is 30%+ African American, the number of "cemeteries with a large number of African American internments" (sic - presumably meaning interments) must be sizable to the point where it's non-defining. In any case, the cemeteries themselves are not African American. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  23:38, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * End of copied material.
 * To give some background, the category came about when I was working on the orphaned page Quinette Cemetery. I was having trouble finding ways to link to this page.  Without links to the page, this cemetery article would be a dead-end.  I at least wanted to add some categories.  I found other pages of historically AA cemeteries.  Some were slave burial areas.  Others were created because blacks were not allowed to use main cemetery.  Several were listed on the National Register of Historical Places.  I looked up one of them (see Union Baptist Cemetery at http://www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com/OH/Hamilton/state6.html ).  Note that the NRHP cites the area of significance as "Black Social History".  So all of the ten cemetery pages in this category are related to AA history.  Also, the Category:Cemeteries in the United States  already has several subcategories for cemeteries of specific groups (Catholic, Jewish, Military).  African American cemeteries seems to me like a natural category.  As for the description, Grutness may have a point that it is vague.  It is probably better limited to, "This category is for historically African American cemeteries."  I'm going to go ahead and make this change.HornColumbia (talk) 04:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe you should wait until other users give an opinion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Personally, I'd say using the categories and  should be sufficient for Quinette; I have no doubt there are cemeteries best-known for their African American historical links, but the vagueness/arbitrariness of the inclusion criteria (Do they need to be specifically defined as African-American, or just contain significant numbers of AA graves? If sothe latter what proportion of the graves have to be of AAs? 100%? 75%? 50%?) seems to go against good Wikipedia practice. I also (slightly) question the analogy with cemeteries for specific religious groups (since cemeteries are often consecrated in the name of one religion) or specific military cemeteries (which are often set aside as war memorials and cemeteries combined). I will, however, note that a good case could be made for categorising Chinese cemeteries separately, so this could well be a useful grouping in the same sort of way - I think it basically just needs more discussion one way or the other. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  13:52, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep and rename per nom. I see this as analogous to Category:Historically black universities and colleges in the United States (maybe add "historically" to the category name?), and the character of such cemeteries will likewise be a consequence of the U.S. history of racial segregation (even in the grave; see also Category:Jewish cemeteries).  So I could see how a cemetery's predominately African America population would be defining and meaningful to group together.  Obviously any article that does not document that it is an African American cemetery should be removed from the category.  But just browsing a few entries from the category shows that for those subjects, it is a defining fact, if not the most defining fact of those cemeteries: Union Baptist Cemetery (Cincinnati, Ohio) ("the oldest Baptist African-American cemetery in Cincinnati, founded in 1864 by members of the Union Baptist Church ["Cincinnati's oldest black church"]), Old City Cemetery (Lynchburg, Virginia) ("from 1806 to 1865...it was the only burial ground, excluding private family graveyards, available to African Americans in the area"), African-American Cemetery (Montgomery, New York) (res ipsa loquitur)...  Postdlf (talk) 15:52, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Historically African American cemeteries would be a better name. Anyone want to weigh in on African American vs. African-American? HornColumbia (talk) 16:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Category:African American, Category:African Americans, Category:African American history... The lack of a hyphen appears consistent in the category system.  Postdlf (talk) 19:43, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and Support Rename to use proper capitalization for this defining characteristic. Alansohn (talk) 19:28, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Rename. No opinion as to keep or delete. Debresser (talk) 21:03, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * REname -- standard format. No view on content.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:47, 29 October 2009 (UTC)


 * 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.