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. ~ Rob13Talk 02:52, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom Uneccessary duplication and a mostly empty category. Dimadick (talk) 07:27, 6 July 2016 (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. Strong arguments that the suggested rename greatly alters the category scope have gone unrefuted. ~ Rob13Talk 02:55, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: more natural title Tim! (talk) 11:23, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This form is used for all similar articles on the European Union, because the category is intended to include only those articles that are about the topic in relation to the European Union as a whole (e.g. EU legislation on the topic). Using the wording "<topic> in the European Union" could lead (and has previously led) readers and editors into thinking that "<topic> within the EU" [i.e. in any EU country] is meant. --Boson (talk) 11:51, 3 July 2016 (UTC) PS: The category page has the following in the introduction:"This category is intended only for health matters concerning the European Union as a whole, and the health agencies, programmes, and initiatives of the European Union. For health in the individual countries in the European Union, please use Category:Health in Europe and associated sub-categories." --Boson (talk) 12:50, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The suggested rename completely changes the scope. Dimadick (talk) 14:26, 3 July 2016 (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. See above rationale. ~ Rob13Talk 02:56, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: more natural title Tim! (talk) 11:20, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This form is used for all similar articles on the European Union, because the category is intended to include only those articles that are about the topic in relation to the European Union as a whole (e.g. EU legislation on the topic). Using the wording "<topic> in the European Union" could lead (and has previously led) readers and editors into thinking that "<topic> within the EU" [i.e. in any EU country] is meant. --Boson (talk) 11:56, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The suggested rename completely changes the scope. Dimadick (talk) 14:27, 3 July 2016 (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:European Union and science and technology[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:keep. See above rationale. ~ Rob13Talk 02:57, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: more natural title Tim! (talk) 11:18, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This form is used for all similar articles on the European Union, because the category is intended to include only those articles that are about the topic in relation to the European Union as a whole (e.g. EU legislation on the topic). Using the wording "<topic> in the European Union" could lead (and has previously led) readers and editors into thinking that "<topic> within the EU" [i.e. in any EU country] is meant. --Boson (talk) 11:57, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The suggested rename completely changes the scope. Dimadick (talk) 14:27, 3 July 2016 (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.
Support per nom. Hugo999 (talk) 21:43, 10 July 2016 (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 (nomination withdrawn). Doczilla@SUPERHEROLOGIST 10:08, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No need to get snarky. Please nominate all band members if you think they should go too, but please provide a stronger rationale if you do. Tim! (talk) 17:13, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator and previous precedents....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:33, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is not overcategorization, nor category by performance. The article on The Three Stooges defines them as a vaudeville act and group of actors that (through a series of line-up changes) stayed active from 1928 to 1975. The closest comparison is to Category:People by organization, which lists everything from music bands to members of large organizations. Dimadick (talk) 14:36, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Opppose This nomination made sense to me and I totally expected to vote delete until I started clicking through the articles. Of the 4 articles I clicked on (Bonnie Bonnell, Fred Sanborn, Christine McIntyre, Shemp Howard), all 4 of them seem defined by career-long involvement with the Three Stooges, not just a passing performance. (Maybe I clicked on a non-representative sampling?) RevelationDirect (talk) 18:11, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Opppose – I picked another 4, all of which began 'XXX is best known as a member of the 3 Stooges'. Oculi (talk) 01:04, 4 July 2016 (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:Recipients of the War Victory Cross[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 War Victory Cross was automatically given to every soldier who served 4 years in the military of the Slovak Republic (1939–45). Even though that Nazi puppet state was small and only lasted 6 years, it was constantly at war so thousands of these awards were given out per the article. An automatic years of service award just doesn't seem defining. A complete list is not practical but, if we decide to delete this category, there is no need to listify because the current contents are here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:40, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Background We deleted similar French and Belgian military years of service awards here and here. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:40, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- Too common an award to be defining. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:51, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Just a service medal and we don't have categories for those. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:02, 6 July 2016 (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:Honorary titles of the United States[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:procedural close. Category was explicitly not nominated for merge and is not empty. - Doczilla@SUPERHEROLOGIST 09:45, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- As long as the articles exist, we should keep the category, which is not empty. If RevelationDirect thinks they articles should not exist, he should take them to AFD, but I doubt that is a sensible option. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:56, 3 July 2016 (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.
