The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Soft redirect. ∞Who?¿? 00:56, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Empty, tagged for deletion by JohnCastle but not listed here. --Kbdank71 13:54, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Though it's redundant with Category:Artamidae, a soft redirect would probably be a good idea here. siafu 15:52, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 00:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• No articles. Doesn't seem to any potential. --Apostrophe 05:19, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No argument. siafu 15:49, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, potential too limited. - choster 21:53, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 00:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category: Characters from The First King of Shannara

Category: Characters from The Voyage of Jerle Shannara

Category: Characters from The High Druid of Shannara

• Empty. Appear to be left-overs from a category rename several weeks back. Articles were moved to new categories, and these were left behind, unpopulated. TexasAndroid 20:13, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. No argument. siafu 21:11, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete of course. Yes, I renamed the categories, but left these behind. Sorry. -- Alex Nisnevich (talk) 21:17, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 00:27, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category: Comoran people

Category: Comoran politicians

• Empty. No parent categories either. Could be easily recreated later if there are people to place in them at the time. TexasAndroid 20:21, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Redundant with Category:Comorian people and Category:Comorian politicians. siafu 21:14, 23 August 2005 (UTC) See comment below Restored my original vote; I'm convinced by SDC. siafu 19:12, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and delete "Comorian" categories, because "Comoran" is the correct adjective refering to the people of Comoros. [1] -- Darwinek 18:16, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Seems to be some disagreement on this; see Comoros and Comorian Franc. Wikipedia uses "Comorian" right now everywhere, but google endorses "Comoran" (30K to 17K). Which way to lean? siafu 18:31, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. I think that really adjective "Comoran" is correct. We have "Comoros" not "Comorios". Maybe we should change it here on Wikipedia to "Comoran" and put somewhere a note about it, for future reference. -- Darwinek 19:42, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The CIA and Google have it wrong. Check official sources. The US State Dept, the UN, the EU, the French government and the Comorian government all say "Comorian." I'm the one who removed all instances of "Comoran" from Wikipedia. Look at the article I wrote on the Comorian franc. There are links to articles from official sites (EU, Banque de France). You'll see that they use "Comorian". Also the French adjective is Comorien/Comorienne. The US State Dept has it right[2], but the CIA World Factbook has it wrong. Go figure. Also, Britannica and other encyclopedias use "Comorian." Darwinek, your logic doesn't hold. What about Canada? Canada --> Canadian. At the time I changed all instances of "Comoran" to "Comorian", Comorian" was by far more common on Wikipedia. Also, to be especially certain, I telephoned the Comorian delegation at the United Nations. Their response was, "There is no word 'Comoran'." I hope this clarifies things. SDC 16:35, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

<Blink>......<Blink><Blink> Wow. That's a *lot* of effort to go through to verify things. My goodness. Nice job. TexasAndroid 16:58, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. as per SDC. --Kbdank71 13:14, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 00:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category: Fictional crocodiles

Category: Fictional mice

• Empty. Content appears to have been moved to Category:Fictional crocodiles and alligators and Category:Fictional mice and rats a week or so back. - TexasAndroid 21:03, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. How necessary can it be, really, to have a seperate Category:Fictional crocodiles and alligators also? Wouldn't Category:Fictional reptiles be enough? siafu 21:20, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. empty. --Kbdank71 13:18, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. ∞Who?¿? 00:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Emptied over two months ago. Category says it can be deleted, but nothing appears to have been done. Doing it now. :) - TexasAndroid 21:08, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. No argument. siafu 21:16, 23 August 2005 (UTC) Keep, now that it's been fixed. siafu 19:06, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for use as a "category disambig" device pointing as a soft redirect to Category:Americas and Category:United States. - choster 00:07, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is a "Category disambig", and how does such work. I'm aware of the disambig pages, but not in a category sense. TexasAndroid 14:09, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • They're not common, but see for example Category:Birmingham, as well as Category:Wikipedia category redirects. - choster 18:02, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Submitter, changing my vote. I like what Choster has done with the category. TexasAndroid 18:11, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I am not sure I like it, but I don't totally dislike it. The problem with even keeping the cat's we soft redirect, is they still end up with articles, and we have to periodically check Category:Wikipedia category redirects to ensure there aren't being used. With this being a disambig cat it doesn't have that capability. ∞Who?¿? 02:07, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Heh, how did I miss that Category:Disambiguation categories.. okay keep. ∞Who?¿? 02:09, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 00:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Empty, appears to have at one point duplicated Category:Anime and manga magazines. - TexasAndroid 21:11, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. empty. --Kbdank71 13:19, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was No consensus (no change). ∞Who?¿? 00:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Empty. - TexasAndroid 21:19, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete this one, though I think I'm going to create Category:Asian swords this evening to go with Category:European swords as there are plenty of articles that would fit. siafu 21:23, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• KEEP', if you're going to create an Asian sword category, it should be divided between South Asian, East Asian, Central Asian and Middle Eastern. Asian swords would be an unholy grabbag of disparate lineages of sword making traditions. 132.205.64.91 23:37, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Go right ahead. For the record, I didn't include Middle Eastern swords in the new category; I only made it to go alongside the European cat. siafu 23:48, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per 132.205.64.91. — Instantnood 18:32, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. it's been empty since nomination, if nobody wants to populate it (anon or Instantnood), it should be deleted. We shouldn't keep around empty cats. --Kbdank71 13:12, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT it seems populated to me. 132.205.44.43 20:09, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 00:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm weaker on this one. It's empty, but still fits into the logical subcategorization of it's parent. Also appears to have survived at least one CFD previously. But still, it's empty. No idea how long it's been so. - TexasAndroid 21:25, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The current categorization scheme has Category:Weapons by country listing countries seperately without a "by <region>" level. siafu 23:45, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Per siafu and it's empty. --Kbdank71 13:23, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was No consensus (no change). ∞Who?¿? 00:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Articles must me moved in one or opposite direction, depending whether animals can have "skills," i.e., learned abilities (I am not good in English language). For example, many horse gaits are definitely something acquired, i.e, skills to my tastes. mikka (t) 22:10, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Neither the category nor the article (Skill) provide a clear description. I'm alomst tempted to vote delete on both due to how widespread and unconnected the collection of articles in this cat is. siafu 19:10, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I'm with siafu. That's the problem with categories like these. Nobody knows what to put in them, so they wind up with everything. --Kbdank71 13:26, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Category:Skills as a parent currently holds other useful subs, delete Category:Human skills as above. ∞Who?¿? 15:33, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 00:34, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant with Category:Lakes of Wisconsin, which is actually named consistently with other categories (i.e., "Lakes of ..."). Tomer ^TALK 23:32, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. No argument. siafu 23:37, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was No consensus (no change). ∞Who?¿? 00:51, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category: Operas by Victor Herbert

Category: Operas by Sigmund Romberg

Category: Operas by Rudolf Friml

Category: Operas by Noel Coward

Category: Operas by Johann Strauss II

Category: Operas by Gentry Warden

Category: Operas by Franz Lehár

Category: Operas by Emmerich Kalman

Category: Operas by Emmanuel Chabrier

Category: Operas by Charles Cuvillier

• All are empty. Appears that they were created with the intention of filling, but then nothing was found to fill them, so the creater unlinked them and left them. - TexasAndroid 01:33, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No argument. siafu 18:37, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, and fill them in. That's what Wikipedia's all about, isn't it, building out legit categories? Someone needs to do some research and writing, not get heavy on the Delete key. 12.73.195.2 20:53, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename as follows:

Category:Operas by Victor Herbert → Category:Operettas by Victor Herbert

Category:Operas by Sigmund Romberg → Category:Operettas by Sigmund Romberg

Category:Operas by Rudolf Friml → Category:Operettas by Rudolf Friml

Category:Operas by Noel Coward → Category:Operettas by Noel Coward

Category:Operas by Johann Strauss II → Category:Johann Strauss II

Category:Operas by Gentry Warden → Category:Operettas by Gentry Warden

Category:Operas by Franz Lehár → Category:Operettas by Franz Lehár

Category:Operas by Emmerich Kalman → Category:Operettas by Emmerich Kalman

Category:Operas by Emmanuel Chabrier → Category:Operettas by Emmanuel Chabrier

Category:Operas by Charles Cuvillier → delete

Articles do exist for several of their works, but WP distinguishes between opera and operetta. - choster 00:16, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per Choster Septentrionalis 21:40, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the empty ones, rename the populated ones. If someone wants to do the research and writing, User 12.73.195.2, the deleted ones can be recreated then. --Kbdank71 13:30, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• D n R per Kbdank71. ∞Who?¿? 15:30, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. ∞Who?¿? 00:53, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• This one composer category appears to be a typo of Category:Operas by Antonin Dvorak. Suggest speedy. - TexasAndroid 01:33, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy d empty and mis-spelled. ∞Who?¿? 15:28, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.