Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 June 16

< June 15	June 17 >

June 16

Category:Caerphilly geography stubs to Category:Caerphilly county borough geography stubs

The relevant stub template has been changed to put the articles into the new category. The old category is now blank and needs deleting. Owain (talk) 11:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:United Kingdom planning law to Category:Town and country planning in the United Kingdom

We need to recategorise all of the articles in the current category-some of them do not pertain exclusively to planning law. Planning law in the United Kindom will then be a sub category of the main category. There has been a small discussion regarding this change on the categories talk page Category talk:United Kingdom planning law--Mcginnly 10:56, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RPG Maker categories

Category:RPG Maker games, Category:RPG Maker sites, Category:RPG Maker users

Those categories will only encourage people to think they're notable enough to be added to Wikipedia. Delete. ' ^{(Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!)} 10:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as long as the unfortunately very notable Super Columbine Massacre RPG! finds a home somewhere.--Mike Selinker 13:46, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People killed by or on behalf of Muhammad

This categories NPOV is questionable, and claiming that Muhammed asked someone to kill these people or someone killed them on behalf of Muhammed is Original Research and it is against wikipedia policies and guidelines «₪Mÿš†íc₪» ^(T) 09:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, this category in my opinion isn't neutral and is sooner demonizing Muhammad. It is unecessarily polemical due to this reasoning. Even it's creator User:Briangotts was fully conscious of that fact. Netscott 09:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Netscott, the diff to which you link doesn't support your characterization. Rather, it seems Brian had assumed - correctly, it appears - that certain religiously and politically minded editors would motion to delete for reasons unrelated to the validity of the category. He was right.Timothy Usher 14:02, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to People killed by order of Muhammad. The category is purely factual; that all these people were indeed killed in fulfillment of Muhammad's will is supported by reliable sources used in the respective articles. Therefore, the charge that the category isn't neutral is entirely spurious. The fears of "deminizing Muhammad" are an example of unwikipedic reasoning. Contrary to Netscott's misrepresentation of Briangotts' comments, the creator of this category simply expressed a (correct) expectation that it may be put up for deletion someday, as any editor can ascertain by clicking the link above. Pecher ^Talk 11:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the reason for renaming is that none of the people included in that category was killed by Muhammad with his own hands; therefore, "by" is not appropriate here. Pecher ^Talk 14:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep, or, in the alternative, rename per Pecher. Muhammad is regarded as a prophet by on the order of a billion people. It is certainly notable that these individuals were killed on his orders. It is shocking to me that this category is proposed for deletion for the stated reason that he should not be "demonized". First of all, asserting that he ordered so and so killed can hardly be demonization when (a) it is factually true, as reported in primary and secondary sources (the accusation of original research boggles my mind) and (b) the articles make no moral judgments on the killings but report them in a factually accurate, NPOV manner (and if it is felt that the articles themselves are POV, the place to address that concern would be the respective article page.) Netscott's citation of my communication to another user is out of line and entirely beside the point. I predicted in that post that someone would tag this category for deletion for blatantly POV reasons and behold, it has come to pass.... --Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib)

Keep Muhammad was both a political and military figure of the 6th century and this is a reasonable way to collect articles about his various slain enemies and rivals. User:Dimadick

Weak Keep, pointless category, not at all sure about the strength of the sources (i.e. I'm not sure a category of 'people brought back to life by jesus' would be any less spurious), but doesn't seem to be doing any harm, and maybe someone finds the grouping useful since they bothered to compile it (although it does seem tolargely consist of a particular tribe, plus named individuals of that tribe, which is a bit redundant). --Coroebus 13:50, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:Actually only one of the individuals listed (Ka'b ibn Asad) was a member of that tribe. The others came from a number of different tribes. Briangotts (Talk)

(Contrib) 13:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well others are from the Banu Nadir, but it doesn't really matter. --Coroebus 14:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to People killed by order of Muhammad as per Pecher.Timothy Usher 13:57, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stong Delete Inflammatory. His Excellency... 14:37, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Leaders of cities in the United States to Category:American mayors

A better name for inclusion in Category:Mayors by country which is what they really are. The proposed name is shorter and clearer about the contents. If there are notable city managers they can be placed in a category for that title. But city leaders are generally know as Mayor. If this really is mostly about mayors, then why not use mayor in the name? If results of this nomination are positive, then the subcategories would need to also be renamed. Vegaswikian 06:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Mayors in the United States; it already exists, and keeps with the trend of preferring "X of/in the United States" to "American X". —Zero Gravitas 06:50, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There appears to be a naming convention for the proposed form. Vegaswikian 06:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the case, move per nom. —Zero Gravitas 07:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Category:Juneau, Alaska~~
Empty and utterly pointless duplicate (and sub-category of!) Category:Juneau City and Borough, Alaska, created two days ago solely as a holder for Category:People from Juneau, Alaska, which I've moved to Category:Juneau City and Borough, Alaska, where it belongs. —Zero Gravitas 05:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment should this be a category redirect? I suspect that is a mistake a lot of editors could make. Vegaswikian 07:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why not. As long as it isn't cluttering up ordinary category-space. —Zero Gravitas 07:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Category:NHS Hospitals~~
~~Empty duplicate of category:NHS hospitals. Delete CalJW 03:17, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]~~
Delete - redundant. Afonso Silva 12:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Category:Non DJ Clue Apperances~~
Give me a break. This would be like "artists who haven't recorded with Carlos Santana." I could see an argument for performers who have appeared with DJ Clue, but this is nuts. JDoorj a m Talk 01:34, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is this a BJAODN? If not it should be. Speedy delete. BoojiBoy 01:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. CalJW 03:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Oh my. ×Meegs 08:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, or else create Category:People who have never been in Cliff Clavin's kitchen —Zero Gravitas 08:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Uninformative. Tim Ivorson 2006-06-16

Delete - so this category tells us that there are only 3 rap artists who have not appeared with DJ Clue? That's amazing. Per nom. Rossrs 13:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Category:LGBT comic book characters to Category:Fictional LGBT characters~~
Reason: The section has numerous entries that were altered to better qualify for the category, these alterations mean that whoever altered them lacked the necessary neutrality required by Wikipedia and are tantamount to vandalism. I feel that merger with the larger category means more eyes, more oversight and hopefully more applied neutrality. All the pages in the category still need to be reviewed, and at least 1/6 need to be corrected as the LGBT comic book characters category was spammed into quite a few pages. Basique 00:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. "LGBT comic book characters" is parsing categories far too finely. The category situation is getting way out of hand, divided into such hair's-breadth differences so as to become only marginally useful.--Tenebrae 02:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The narrow focus of the category has been helpful to me. I don't want to have to wade through LGBT characters in other mediums to find the material I need for my research. Breakaway 03:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. CalJW 03:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Feeds directly into category:Comics characters and category:Fictional LGBT characters. Works great for me.--Mike Selinker 05:56, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Comic books are a significant and unique medium with its own unique fanbase. For people who want to research LGBT representation in this specific medium, keeping the categories distinct is invaluable. And there seems to be plenty of interest in this very specific topic, with recent news articles on the upcoming lesbian Batwoman, plus the speculation about Superman Returns. Why complicate a research tool unnecessarily? Perceive 06:56, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Mike S. It has problems, as described in the nomination, but nearly one hundred members makes this a very practical subcategory of Category:Fictional LGBT characters. ×Meegs 08:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Practical and populated subcategory. Afonso Silva 12:08, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - The merger would result in a parent category with over 200 articles and locating comic book characters would become a task in itself. User:Dimadick
It's a large category precisely because of the mislabeling of certain pages, which it seems was deliberately done to build up the size of the category. --Basique 13:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And I encourage you to root out the ones that don't belong there. But Northstar, Akbar and Jeff, and Cherry Poptart, to name a few off the top of my head, certainly deserve being in this category. Even Mary Jane Watson, who's as heterosexual as they come in the mainstream comics, has been portrayed as a lesbian character, and so doesn't seem a mislabeling to me.--Mike Selinker 14:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]