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: I don't why we need a separate category when we have one like American Islamists. Greenbörg(talk) 15:05, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: We do have a category structure for jihadist groups, but not one for individuals. -- Black Falcon(talk) 05:31, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if the category is not kept, it should be upmerged to Category:American Islamists rather than deleted, so that these articles are not removed from the 'Islamists' category tree. -- Black Falcon(talk) 23:16, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Rename if kept to Category:American mujahideen; use the actual term, not some neologism. No opinion on keeping or deleting. Nyttend (talk) 02:13, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Inconsistent with similar categories. — Zawl 15:00, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We don't tend to cat someone by a former occupation. You're either notable for being a DJ, or your not. LugnutsFire Walk with Me 17:25, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the cat., the former occupation is a extra tend. SA 13 Bro (talk) 17:40, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Lugnuts....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:12, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but why is the category empty? A category should not be emptied before it is nominated for deletion, or during the deletion discussion, since it prevents anyone else from evaluating the category's contents. -- Black Falcon(talk) 03:07, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Black Falcon: I have restored from Danny Yeo article. I'm busy in global Meta-Wiki for doing Chinese language translations on the projects site and not very much time in Wikipedia nowadays, sorry about that. SA 13 Bro (talk) 16:01, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Merge as above. Obviously. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:24, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Universities and colleges in Tamilnadu[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.
Merge as above. Obviously. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:24, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Television Series by Dong Yang Animation Co., LTD[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. -- Black Falcon(talk) 02:01, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: The captioned defunct group has already merged since 2015. Wrightbus (talk) 09:32, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: The captioned defunct group has already merged since 2015. Wrightbus (talk) 09:31, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Wikipedians who like Cool Freaks' Wikipedia Club[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. ℯxplicit 06:38, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Violates WP:USERCAT in that it is a category that does not foster encyclopedic collaboration. "Cool Freaks' Wikipedia Club" appears to be something completely made up as part of the associated userbox. There is extensive precedent to delete categories for those in defunct or non existent projects because there is no way that such a category can foster collaboration to improve content. VegaDark (talk) 05:34, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, either as a category for a defunct/fake project, a nonsensical category (perhaps even patent nonsense?), or overcategorization on the basis of an irrelevant like. In any case, in terms of facilitating collaboration between users to improve the encyclopedia, there is no value in grouping users who "like" a "cool" club, especially ones who so blatantly do not follow club rules. -- Black Falcon(talk) 05:46, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
See my revised rationale below. -- Black Falcon(talk) 03:06, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's a Facebook group [1] for sharing cool Wikipedia articles. It has over 46,000 members and is definitely not made up. [2] It facilitates collaboration on articles that are shared in the group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.230.214 (talk) 16:49, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for explaining to what this refers. While it sounds like the Facebook group (off-wiki) may facilitate collaboration, how does this category (on-wiki) facilitate collaboration? Thanks, -- Black Falcon(talk) 03:06, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Wikipedians interested in Counter Culture[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. ℯxplicit 06:38, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This user category appears to be too broadly defined given the broad definition of counterculture as any subculture that diverges from mainstream culture. However, if this category could faciltiate collaboration between users to improve topics related to counterculture, then it should be renamed to correct capitalization and spacing (per Category:Counterculture). (Category creator not notified: inactive) -- Black Falcon(talk) 05:39, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Rename -- This sounds as if it might be a useful user category. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:34, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Rename if kept. No opinion at this time as to if it should be deleted or kept - I would need to gather a better understanding of the subject of the articles this is intended to include to adequately judge if I agree the scope is to large to facilitate collaboration. Changed to delete per Marcocapelle. VegaDark (talk) 04:34, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a too vague topic to be interested in, category has existed for 5 years now and only 2 editors are in this category. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, seems too vague to be useful looking at the range of potentially included topics. VegaDark (talk) 03:54, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: This userbox-popoulated category aims to group users based on a shared sexual fetish, not actually an "interest" in improving content related to the topic. It is, therefore, overcategorization on the basis of an irrelevant preference, and fails to provide a basis for collaboration between users to improve the encyclopedia. Even as an interest category, which this is currently not, any collaborative potential would be limited to just one article (Paraphilic infantilism), so this is also overcategorization based on an overly narrow scope. (Category creator not notified: inactive, no edits unrelated to this category and associated userboxes) -- Black Falcon(talk) 05:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- I do not even know what ABDL is. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:35, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell from the userboxes, ABDL stands for "Adult Baby/Diaper Lover". -- Black Falcon(talk) 20:11, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 October 2#Category:American jihadists. -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:41, 2 October 2017 (UTC)