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. I am boldly merging the (mostly small) duplicate categories that exist on other Wikipedias too (Russian, Farsi, Hindi, Slovenian, Belarusian); several other languages have only one category for this topic. – FayenaticLondon 23:09, 4 November 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The result of the discussion was:Nomination withdrawn - With the belated revelation that there is a subcategory being added, I'm withdrawing this nomination. AussieLegend (✉) 15:52, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: This category was deleted in 2010 because it contained only 3 links. The navbox was deleted, but an unreferenced episode that fails to establish notability of the subject was created sometime ago. The category was recreated today, but still only contains 3 links, so nothing has changed and the original reason for deletion is still valid.I did empty the cat and tagged it with {{db-catempty}} but the editor who recreated the cat is persistently repopulating it with its 3 links. WP:SMALLCAT applies, as the series has ended and there is no likelihood of expansion beyond the current three articles, and I have prodded one of these. AussieLegend (✉) 15:32, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm adding a subcat in minutes. You're persistently undoing my work. The cat was deleted partly because there was a navbox - but that no longer exists. Jim Michael (talk) 15:38, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've already said the navbox was deleted. That's irrelevant. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:41, 22 October 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.
Nominator's rationale:delete, follow-up on this earlier discussion, content of this category is about sports, arts and academics, i.e. unrelated to each other. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:13, 22 October 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:Fictional United States government agents[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. — ξxplicit 03:04, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: More precise term; most of these are agents/agencies on a federal level (as oppose to state/local). --Atvica (talk) 08:07, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- Since this is a fictional category, it may be best to leave it imprecise. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:51, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The current name works. It is not just the Postal service category who are not law enforcement, but some of the inteligence gatherers as well.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:40, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
keep looking at the subcats of this category, I see they all fit well under this name so no reason to change. It is well known that the 'United States government' refers to the National/Federal government and not to states or localities. Hmains (talk) 06:02, 6 November 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 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.
