Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 June 3

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
< June 2 June 4 >

June 3

Category:Gateway Ancestors to the United States

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 01:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining. Category appears to be single-sourced to an arbitrary list in a non-notable book by pop genealogist Gary Boyd Roberts. No evidence of WP:COI, but the effect is category spam: it promotes Gateway Ancestors (non-notable as book or as concept) on each bio page. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 18:34, 3 June 2017 (UTC) revised 20:04, 3 June 2017 (UTC), revised 13:46, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – effectively unsourced as the list is not provided anywhere, and not mentioned in the articles. I have no idea what a Gateway ancestor might be. Oculi (talk) 00:32, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- a Gateway ancestor is a person whose ancestry is known. If a genealogy is linked to that person, it leads to the discovery of a large number of other ancestors. A typical case is linking back to a member of the older British peerage, which leads one back to other lords and perhaps even to royal ancestors. In some countries there will be 1000s of such people, but being one will be a NN characteristic. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:52, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – per Oculi's logic, extremely vague and since "gateway ancestor" has no clear cut definition this category is rather unneeded. Inter&anthro (talk) 22:29, 7 June 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:Recipients of the Order "For Merit to the Fatherland", 4th class

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 01:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining, 4th tier decoration for meritorious service. Fails WP:CATDEF & WP:OCAWARD. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:00, 3 June 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:Recipients of the Order for Service to the Homeland in the Armed Forces of the USSR, 3rd class

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 01:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining, 3rd tier decoration for meritorious service. Fails WP:CATDEF & WP:OCAWARD. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:57, 3 June 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:Recipients of the Order of the Red Star

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 01:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Non-defining category: none of the recipients are known for having received this decoration. Too common to be defining: over 3 million have been awarded. Fails WP:CATDEF & WP:OCAWARD. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:54, 3 June 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:Adventure Outdoor Education

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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 19:21, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Serves no use. Created by promotional account to list his own company. Yintan  17:46, 3 June 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:Thinking about climbing

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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 19:22, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Serves no use. Created by promotional account to list his own company. Yintan  17:46, 3 June 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:Public Establishment of Television

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 01:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Recently created category with no obvious criteria for inclusion. However, it appears that the category only contains programs that have appeared on Algerian "Public establishment of television" network. Based on other TV articles, this would be better served by a navbox than a category. AussieLegend (✉) 16:42, 3 June 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:Skop Productions contract players

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 (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 06:00, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No scheme of contract players by studio. Studio doesn't even have article. Questionable defining aspect. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 05:28, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Added parent category to the nomination. If Category:Skop Productions contract players should be deleted, the parent category becomes redundant as well. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Marcocapelle (talk) 13:19, 3 June 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:Future Railway Stations in Israel

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. ℯxplicit 01:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Duplicate cats Le Deluge (talk) 11:30, 3 June 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:Canon of Amsterdam

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 01:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete per WP:NONDEF, also we don't even have an article about a Canon of Amsterdam. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:22, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I thought this had been nominated a few days ago, but perhaps that was the article (and maybe it was then deleted). It seemed to be an author's selection of 50 landmarks or events in the city. The selection was a POV issue of that author. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:34, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:Military equipment of the Netherlands, there being no Category:Forts in Amsterdam or related lower categories. :-) Seriously, delete; what's the point of a category for a specific topic on which we have no article? We don't need articles for all categories, especially for categories that are merely logical subdivisions of another broader topic (e.g. "Cannons of Amsterdam" if we had tons of articles about Dutch artillery, and we needed to split them up by municipality), but as none of the topics at Canon are intimately tied to Amsterdam, we don't even have a way to know what "Canon of Amsterdam" means. Nyttend (talk) 02:01, 6 June 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:Science writers of medieval Islam

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:  Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 June 14#Category:Science writers of medieval Islam. ℯxplicit 01:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only the scientists who wrote became notable. so we don't need two categories. – Fayenatic London 07:26, 3 June 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:Companies formerly listed on the Amsterdam Stock Exchange

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:  Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 June 14#Category:Companies formerly listed on the Amsterdam Stock Exchange. ℯxplicit 01:58, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: this is a very unusual category because it does not contain companies that were delisted, but instead the Amsterdam Stock Exchange itself has become a former institute as it merged into Euronext. I don't think that companies should be categorized by this. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:35, 3 June 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_June_3&oldid=1138411076"