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 under CSD G4 (recreation of deleted material). While this specific category was never created before, the precedent of this discussion should hold. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:28, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User mzn-0 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete. 0-level category, which have all previously been deleted as not helping the encyclopedia. Empty except for a template. VegaDark (talk) 23:32, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all It does not aid collaboration on the English edition of this site to know that someone doesn't speak a language (other than English.) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:37, 26 October 2011 (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: Speedy delete under CSD G4 (recreation of deleted material). While this specific category was never created before, the precedent of this discussion should hold. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User frp-0 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete. 0-level category, which have all previously been deleted as not helping the encyclopedia. VegaDark (talk) 23:30, 25 October 2011 (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: Speedy delete under CSD G4 (recreation of deleted material). While this specific category was never created before, the precedent of this discussion should hold. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User Hani-0 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete. 0-level category, which have all previously been deleted as not helping the encyclopedia. Empty except for a template. VegaDark (talk) 23:26, 25 October 2011 (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: Speedy delete under CSD G4 (recreation of deleted material). While this specific category was never created before, the precedent of this discussion should hold. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:34, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User LdP-0 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete. 0-level category, which have all previously been deleted as not helping the encyclopedia. Empty except for a template. VegaDark (talk) 23:24, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not useful bordering on vanityCurb Chain (talk) 02:03, 26 October 2011 (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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:19, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Los Angeles Open (golf) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete. No reason for this category to exist, it's only entry is already in the parent category. Tewapack (talk) 21:23, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator- William 23:07, 25 October 2011 (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: Double upmerge. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:15, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging:

• Category:Blue Line (MBTA) stations in Boston, Massachusetts to Category:Blue Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Boston, Massachusetts
• Category:Blue Line (MBTA) stations in Suffolk County, Massachusetts to Category:Blue Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Suffolk County, Massachusetts
• Category:Green Line (MBTA) stations in Boston, Massachusetts to Category:Green Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Boston, Massachusetts
• Category:Green Line (MBTA) stations in Brookline, Massachusetts to Category:Green Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Norfolk County, Massachusetts Category:Railway stations in Brookline, Massachusetts
• Category:Green Line (MBTA) stations in Middlesex County, Massachusetts to Category:Green Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Middlesex County, Massachusetts
• Category:Green Line (MBTA) stations in Norfolk County, Massachusetts to Category:Green Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Norfolk County, Massachusetts
• Category:Orange Line (MBTA) stations in Boston, Massachusetts to Category:Orange Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Boston, Massachusetts
• Category:Orange Line (MBTA) stations in Middlesex County, Massachusetts to Category:Orange Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Middlesex County, Massachusetts
• Category:Red Line (MBTA) stations in Boston, Massachusetts to Category:Red Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Boston, Massachusetts
• Category:Red Line (MBTA) stations in Middlesex County, Massachusetts to Category:Red Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Middlesex County, Massachusetts
• Category:Red Line (MBTA) stations in Norfolk County, Massachusetts to Category:Red Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Norfolk County, Massachusetts

Rationalle: These seem to be trivial intersections. In fact, as far as I can tell, no other lines have such intersection categories. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:29, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. The number of stations is not so overwhelming, even for the Green Line, to require this level of subcategorization— every other major rapid transit system is subcategorized by jurisdiction and/or service, but not both (and a couple not at all. In particular, the use of county subdivisions is less than ideal as the county is not a meaningful level of government in most of southern New England.- choster (talk) 15:43, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not Category:Green Line (MBTA) stations in Brookline, Massachusetts to Category:Green Line (MBTA) stations and Category:Railway stations in Norfolk County, Massachusetts(since there is no Category:Railway stations in Brookline, Massachusetts). I created Category:Railway stations in Brookline, Massachusetts) as it was missing. One does not merge upward and lose the fact these stations belong in the Category:Buildings and structures in Brookline, Massachusetts Hmains (talk) 03:26, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed nomination based on this comment. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:58, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not upmerge The result of this upmerge will result in 95 articles on stations directly in Category:Railway stations in Boston, Massachusetts. When I saw this, I created the subcats by 'line' so that there would not be so many and so one could readily navigate stations by 'line'. I then extended the subcats out to the surrounding cities and counties. If there are this many stations in other cities with multiple 'lines', then such subcats should be created for them also. The point of categories is to help the reader easily find information, not to follow some undefinable 'trivial' rule. Hmains (talk) 03:38, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think that 95 stations is too problematic. Notice, for example, that Category:Railway stations by city has other categories ehich are over 100. I would draw the line at 200, sincwe that is what would go on a single page. And we have a category scanning tool, which would allow users to find all this information even if the categories are merged as proposed. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:04, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regardless of numbers of stations in a city, Category:Railway stations by city also shows the cities in which station sub-cats exist, organized by 'line' or operating company. Quite a few. Hmains (talk) 02:59, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Which cities have by line? עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:26, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Try Category:Railway stations in Barcelona, Category:Railway stations in Munich or Category:Interborough Rapid Transit Company stations. Each is different, based on the actual situation in the city. This is my point. Hmains (talk) 04:41, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I see categories for lines which are contained within a single city; as well as categories of systems. You could possibly make a case that there should be a category for the Boston Subway system, even possibly a separate category for the Green Line (which is trollies); I did propose there being categories for stations by line (which have since been created). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:35, 1 November 2011 (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 (empty).--Mike Selinker (talk) 05:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:People murdered by Westies (criminal organization) to Category:People murdered by The Westies

Nominator's rationale: The gang is called The Westies and this article is a subcat of The Westies, so let's make things simpler and simply say People murdered by The Westies. RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 15:21, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. If renamed, I would say just rename to Category:People murdered by the Westies (without the capital T on the), since the main article is just Westies. Mind you, Westie is a disambiguation page, which is probably why disambiguation has been added in this case. I'm neutral in this instance. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 20:51, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per the dab rationale. It's not about people murdered by small dogs unfortunately. --Northernhenge (talk) 20:19, 26 October 2011 (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: put it back. The promised speedy nominations never followed the last discussion, so I'm putting it back to where it was. I've renamed

Category:Multi-sport events by country to Category:Sports festivals by country

Category:Multi-sport events in Canada to Category:Sports festivals in Canada

Category:Multi-sport events in China to Category:Sports festivals in China

Category:Multi-sport events in Denmark to Category:Sports festivals in Denmark

Category:Multi-sport events in India to Category:Sports festivals in India

Category:Multi-sport events in the Netherlands to Category:Sports festivals in the Netherlands

Category:Multi-sport events in the United Kingdom to Category:Sports festivals in the United Kingdom

Category:Multi-sport events in the United States to Category:Sports festivals in the United States

Further subcategorization can begin as desired.--Mike Selinker (talk) 14:36, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is terrible what was done to this category due to the renaming form Sports festivals by country to Multi-sport events by country. A multi-sport event is clearly a subcategory of sports festivals, but never all sports festivals are multi-sport events, see for instance Category:Multi-sport events in the United States and Category:Sports festivals in Germany. And see also the interwikis - here is needed Sports festivals by country as correct name.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Florentyna (talk • contribs) 13:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah, what is being proposed? Vegaswikian (talk) 19:18, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Based on the CfR tag on the category, I'd guess that it's renaming back to Category:Sports festivals by country. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 19:44, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, renaming it back. And also all Multi-sport events in (country) categories back to Sports festivals in (country). Nevertheless the Multi-sport categories will be useful, too, as subcategory of Sports festivals by country. Means: First a bot supported substitution of all Multi-sport categories to Sports festivals must be done. The Multi-sport categories must not be deleted, they will be recreated as subcategories of Sports festivals. --Florentyna (talk) 20:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and rename - by keeping the current tree, and recreating the old tree, and then someone will have to link the two together. 65.94.77.11 (talk) 07:40, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and create Category:International sports competitions by country. This is a classic case of two arguments which do not conflict but are being presented as such. The term sports festivals is not clear (or certainly not clear enough for the blunt category structure). International sports competitions is analogous, significantly easier to understand, and matches the French mirror of fr:Catégorie:Événement sportif international par pays. A multi-sport events category can happy co-exist as a sub-category of this. In my opinion, the sole question remaining is: do we rename the sports festival categories to " International sports competitions" ones and create multi-event sub-cats, or vice versa? SFB 17:24, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• • International would not be so good, because we will get problems with national multi-sports events (Chinese national games etc.) Florentyna (talk) 18:17, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Those articles need not go in the international category then, just the multi-sport event one. We can keep the two types as separate branches of Category:Sports competitions. SFB 17:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Separate branches?. Are you saying hierarchy should be: Category:Sports competitions → 1) International sports competitions by country 2) Multi-sport events? — Bill william compton^Talk 19:58, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would not do too much confusion in one step. Let's first recreate the former state of the art, then we need to sort in a proper way all the competitions into the correct branches (what will be already a lot of work). The "international" thing should be discussed later due to new confusions probably arising from that (what is a football match Spain-Netherlands?). At the moment the categories are really wrong. Let's at first create a correct tree. Florentyna (talk) 20:36, 10 November 2011 (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:

Propose renaming Category:Transportation reliability to Category:Transport reliability

Nominator's rationale: Rename. It's already been estaablished that except where ENGVAR indicates that American English should be used, we use the word "transport", not "transportation".. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:48, 25 October 2011 (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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 05:39, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Category:Rotenburg (Wümme) district to Category:Rotenburg district

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate category for articles related to Rotenburg (district). Markussep ^Talk 11:25, 25 October 2011 (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: Rename, with no prejiduce against a reverse renaming as part of the entire Category:Sport in Ireland by year tree. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 20:04, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming

Category:1922 in Irish sport to Category:1922 in Irish sports & Category:1923 in Irish sport to Category:1923 in Irish sports

Nominator's rationale:

The 21st century years in sport for Ireland are all Category:2005 in Irish sports (sports with an s) so these years should be the same as the series by year for Ireland may eventually fill up between 1924 and 2002. Note though that there are more countries using sport (singular) eg Category:2011 in Australian sport with only two using sports eg Category:2011 in American sports. But all the years for a particular country should be uniform. Hugo999 (talk) 10:27, 25 October 2011 (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: rename. We can speedily rename the entire tree to match the article format.--Mike Selinker (talk) 06:19, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:Soria Province to Category:Province of Soria

Nominator's rationale: Per main. I'm putting this at CfD instead of speedy to ensure that there's consensus for renaming this entire scheme: Category:Provinces of Spain. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:18, 25 October 2011 (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: rename.--Mike Selinker (talk) 06:20, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:People associated with Dalkey to Category:People from Dalkey

Nominator's rationale: There are thousands of categories of the sort "People from X" rather than this naming scheme. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:23, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Query What to do with Bono? He's not from Dalkey but he currently lives there. Same is true for other famous residents. Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:50, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Response If you live somewhere, you are from there. It's my understanding that "People from X" categories are intentionally broad, so that you can be born there or have resided there in order to "be from" there. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• In fact, it's quite questionable whether merely being born somewhere makes a person be "from" there. Category discussions have always decided that place of birth is not of biographical importance but not defining. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:20, 27 October 2011 (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.