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.
Delete Per the multiple similar categories already deleted for the same reason. Lugnuts (talk) 10:19, 22 June 2012 (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:Rename. This category is for Kyrgyz-language literature. The category for literature of Kyrgyzstan is at Category:Kyrgyzstani literature. We need to add the "language" because sometimes "Kyrgyz" is used as a synonym for "Kyrgyzstani". Good Ol’factory(talk) 23:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment is this supposed to be for the language or both the language and ethnic literature as well? 70.49.127.65 (talk) 04:15, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per the well-reasoned nomination. Since "Kyrgyz" is ambiguous, applied both to the language and the nationality, it is necessary to clarify the scope of this category as a part of Category:Literature by language. -- Black Falcon(talk) 04:40, 22 June 2012 (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:SPEEDY DELETE, empty "category." postdlf (talk) 02:42, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This is a draft article, not a category. The draft cites no reliable sources and states that "pogging" was invented yesterday, so this isn't a viable article either, per WP:NOTNEO. John of Reading (talk) 21:24, 21 June 2012 (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.
Note: I declare my interest as a Freegle group moderator. – FayenaticLondon 07:28, 21 June 2012 (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 is a classic example of a "current" category of the sort that is discouraged. The header notes: "currently flying aerobatic teams". Yet some of these teams come and go; some in the category are no doubt defunct. This category should be merged into its parent (then redifussed as necessary), as the "modern" (misnamed as well as inappropriate) lable is not useful to Wikipedia's readers, nor is it defining. The BushrangerOne ping only 06:06, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge -- the split between current/former is deplored in WP. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:06, 28 June 2012 (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.
