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: In general we do not categorize by former membership of a particular group. The circumstances of these people leaving the Royal Academy (two were expelled, one resigned) can be explained in the article(s). Tassedethe (talk) 21:23, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(Disclosure: I am the category's creator -- just to add, the category is not fully populated yet. It would be about 15 at full whack I reckon.) I have to say, I don't know why we shouldn't categorise by former memberships, as we do for (say) religions (Category:Former Jehovah's Witnesses) or certain honours (Category:Former Members of the Order of Australia). Category:People stripped of a British Commonwealth honour and Category:People expelled from public office provide alternative naming schemes that could be applied here if preferred (although I can't quite think how you'd phrase in the case of RAs). The key aspect which differentiates the people in these categories from, say, most politicians, is that is a very salient facet of their life that they had something bestowed upon them which is normally for a lengthy period of time, and then through a newsworthy series of events this arrangement ended prematurely. Now, there are definitely some boundary issues (for the moment I don't know what to do with Retirees, for example) but I think there is a useful concept here that is worth capturing. - Jarry1250[Vacationneeded] 21:59, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It would strike me then that this is more suitable as a list. The circumstances (expelled, resigned, retired, died, whatever) can then be explained, see category disadvantages WP:DOAC and list advantages WP:AOAL.
I agree a list would be useful. But the question of categorisation would still occur. Would one categorise them as RAs, even though they had been expelled? - Jarry1250[Vacationneeded] 20:47, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- There are many precedents for not splitting out former holders from current ones. If the category were Category:People expelled from the Royal Academy, it might be legitimate, but those who have retired, died, or merely failed to pay a subscription should not be separated out. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:54, 30 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:Central-Leatherstocking, New York geography stubs[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 22:33, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Central-Leatherstocking Region was a NYS Dept. of Economic Development tourism region since renamed to Central New York Region MB 20:46, 23 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.
The result of the discussion was:no consensus. – FayenaticLondon 08:14, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge per nom. Not a defined scheme (Category:Albums by artist is defined as such but not these subtypes) but a nice option when diffusion of the parent Foo albums category would be beneficial (such as Category:The Who live albums). --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:43, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As defined by the project: MOS:ALBUMS#Categorization says "a category for an artist's albums should be created even if they have only released one album." There is no such statement for releasing 1 live album or 1 compilation album. While many such categories exist, it is not an across-the-board standard. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:59, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Accepted by whom? Breaking down an artist's material makes sense when there is a lot of it, or when it is of distict types, but not in this case. Rathfelder (talk) 19:55, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Accepted by the community as no-one has taken Category:Live albums by artist to cfd as far as I know. I see this primarily as breaking down Category:Live albums into 'by artist' subcats; I am indifferent to the strictures of MOS:ALBUMS. Oculi (talk) 17:29, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support, it doesn't make sense to create two categories for just one article. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:55, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge The live album category should only exist as a subcat if there is another subcat. We categorize all albums by creator, we do not have any requirement that all albums be in more precise than that.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:44, 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.
Rename per nom and the actual defined scheme according to MOS:ALBUM and Category:Albums by artist. The same does not have to apply to these sub-types of albums such as live albums and compilations albums by artist. Regardless of result, Category:Denis Charles albums should be created either as the sole category or the parent. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:50, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to albums. While having album categories with one entry is justified, having live albums categories that are such is not.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:43, 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.
Nominator's rationale: Contains only two entries. One is a team known across Europe, the other has not had its league position information updated since 2008. Unlikely to ever expand. Overcategorisation 87.222.235.118 (talk) 19:24, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Contains only one entry. Setúbal has a population of under 120,000 so this is unlikely to ever be filled. Overcategorisation. 87.222.235.118 (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate scope of Category:Football clubs in Portugal by city, as it is not containing categories pertaining to regions. 87.222.235.118 (talk) 19:19, 23 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: Too small, not needed for eponymous category. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:25, 23 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.
Populate (removing current headnote). UK used to have a Ministry of Housing and Local Government, so that I do not believe this to be a hopeless category. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:53, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Many countries have ministers responsible for local government.Rathfelder (talk) 19:52, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a few more articles. I'm sure more can be found.Rathfelder (talk) 19:37, 25 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.
The result of the discussion was:merge. I will also start lists of notable people in the articles on the towns. – FayenaticLondon 21:53, 1 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.
