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. MER-C 03:36, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Clearly redundant, no strong preference on the name but the Ancient History one seems more established as a tree. RevelationDirect (talk) 12:59, 13 April 2015 (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:delete. MER-C 12:10, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not a defining characteristic, see WP:OCAWARD, adequately covered in templates and lists The-Pope (talk) 12:11, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- We would not allow Category:AFL Rising Star winners under WP:OCAWARD, so that we should not allow nominees. The outcome would normally be to listify a winners' category, but that is not necessary here. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:55, 13 April 2015 (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:Historical coats of arms of Hungary[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:merge. MER-C 12:35, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:Upmerge since coats of arms is a historical topic by definition. No other country has a separate historical coats of arms category. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge -- There will not be enough to need to split out present from past. Coats of arms are not merely historical: they are still used as logos on occasions. I do not know about this case. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:59, 13 April 2015 (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:delete. – FayenaticLondon 07:40, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this page has been superseded by Category:Wikipedians whose talkpages are decorated by Hafspajen, which goes on the user page, rather than the talk page. This solves the issue of the category being archived, thus this category is redundant. Further to thus, the naming is wrong. The category doesn't go on talk pages it goes on user talk pages. --kelapstick(bainuu) 14:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh mighty Bishzilla, peace be upon the brave fire breathing zilla. Perhaps Pages decorated by Hafspajen would be more appropriate, which would make the category all encompassing?--kelapstick(bainuu) 12:42, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly merge to kelapstick's target. It certainly shgould not be in ordinary category space. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:57, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete These are not pages in Hafspajen 's userspace, they are other people's talk pages, which presumably does not contain only Hafspajen 's contributions. They are not defined by having Hafspajen make a comment. This is equivalent to Category:Pages edited by Hafspajen, which is something we do not categorize by, since it is not significant. A Wikipedia search restricted to usertalkspace for Hafspajen edits would find the talk pages. If they want a userbox to indicate interaction with Hafspajen, then that's a different matter (per the superceded category comment) -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:35, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Users should not be playing with categories; it is not (IMO) humourous and just clutters up things like the list of uncategorized categories. DexDor(talk) 06:15, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural Close re-nom of CfD closed as keep from a month ago. No nomination rationale provided. ―Padenton|✉ 19:42, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete serves no cooperative value and thus fails to meet the requirements for user categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:09, 17 May 2015 (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:Military facilities of the United States in Germany[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:rename. – FayenaticLondon 08:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:Rename. As per previous nominations, 'military facility' to 'military installation'. Buckshot06(talk) 00:04, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Much to my surprise, the broader speedy nomination was challenged. To be clear to the closing administrator, I *do* favor this nomination. RevelationDirect (talk) 15:26, 30 April 2015 (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.
