Category:Animated films nominated for Best Writing Academy Award[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:delete.--Mike Selinker (talk) 21:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:Delete. My understanding is that we don't use categories for any of the Academy Award nominations, only for winners. (We don't even categorize films for being nominated for Best Picture.) This category is somewhat odd because it combines two separate awards (Best Original Screenplay and Best Adapted Screenplay) and is applied only to animated films that were nominated for either. Good Ol’factory(talk) 23:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom, yes we don't cat films by the awards they are nominated for. Lugnuts (talk) 07:58, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm inclined to keep more awards categories than most editors but even I can't stomach just being nominated. RevelationDirect (talk) 14:25, 29 January 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) 21:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:Rename. Suggest renaming to match main article Asamblea del Año XIII. The standard for categories for members of legislative bodies is "Members of XXX", where XXX is the WP article name of the legislative body. Good Ol’factory(talk) 22:59, 27 January 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 per nom. Ruslik_Zero 17:48, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose rename all. It is the standard naming convention in college sports, specifically WikiProject College Basketball, that when a school's men's and women's basketball programs use different nicknames, the gender-identifier portion of the category title gets dropped due to redundancy. That's why there is Category:Old Dominion Monarchs basketball players versus Category:Old Dominion Lady Monarchs basketball players. I had tried to speedily rename these, but someone didn't want to hear it and I was forced to bring these to a full CfD. Jrcla2 (talk) 19:34, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rename per nom. Would match existing convention. Rikster2 (talk) 21:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rename. Well established category convention.--Mike Selinker (talk) 22:44, 27 January 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.
Support. Yes, moving that into Steriods would make sense. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:29, 27 January 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) 21:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Propose upmerge of Category:Estranes into Category:Steroids. Only one entry and one sub-category I proposed for deletion (above). Could be populated, but Category:Steroids has only 155 pages (excluding sub-cats) so I see no need to do so. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Many steroids are estranes, and I don't see anything special or useful about collecting those that are (the main article for this cat is about the parent structure itself and is a stub that doesn't look like it would even survive AFD, nothing really about the class of compounds other than that the parent structure is the parent structure of them. DMacks (talk) 16:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Yes, I agree with that. If anything, there is even less of a need for this one than for Estradiols. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:30, 27 January 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.
Category:People from Queanbeyan, New South Wales[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.--Mike Selinker (talk) 21:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: There is no need for disambiguation as this is a unique name. The main article is at Queanbeyan and the parent category is at Category:Queanbeyan. Mattinbgn (talk) 09:32, 27 January 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 per nom. Ruslik_Zero 17:52, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per main article. Some subcats. may need to be renamed, too if this passes. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:49, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I won't presume to offer an opinion but I will note the existence of Peel (Western Australia), also called Peel region. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 09:17, 27 January 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 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) 21:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to nominate others as appropriate. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:22, 29 January 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 מישהוOd Mishehu 08:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:Delete. For reasons stated in this CFD, I don't see how someone coming across an uncategorized song would categorize it here rather than a more appropriate category. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 01:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support This makes sense to me. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and previous consensus. Lugnuts (talk) 07:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Though I like the irony of this category. Resolute 17:39, 27 January 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.