Misplaced Pages

:Categories for discussion/User: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:15, 2 June 2007 edit68.42.141.76 (talk) →[]← Previous edit Latest revision as of 02:23, 3 February 2022 edit undoEthanGaming7640 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users17,055 edits Modifying redirect categories using Capricorn ♑ 
Line 1: Line 1:
#REDIRECT ]
{{cfdu-header}}


{{Redirect category shell|
==Speedy nominations==
{{R from merge}}
<div width="90%" class="boilerplate metadata" id="speedy" style="text-align: left; background: skyblue; padding:0px; border: 1px solid #333366; margin-top:2px; margin-bottom:2px;">
{{R to project namespace}}
*If you have a legitimate candidate for speedy rename/merge/delete, place them here instead of under the date.
{{R from subpage}}
*If something listed here is not a clear case for speedy, please re-list under the current date.</div>
}}

==New nominations by date==
<div width="90%" class="boilerplate metadata" id="speedy" style="text-align: left; background: skyblue; padding:0px; border: 1px solid #333366; margin-top:2px; margin-bottom:2px;">
*Please list new nominations at the top of the list for today's date.</div>

=== June 1 ===

==== Xbox ====
*] to ]
*] to ]
Per such discussions as the one below.--] 14:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

*'''Oppose rename''' of Xbox Live, '''support rename''' of Xbox 360. Xbox live is an online service, and therefore there are not exactly "games" for the feature, as would be expected.--] 17:39, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Xbox live category, '''rename''' 360 category. Don't need a category for those who play Xbox live, a category for that would only facilitate collaboration on 1 more article than its parent category, so it is unnecessary. Don't upmerge, since both regular Xbox and Xbox 360 use Xbox live and there isn't any way to know which applies to each user. ] (]) 23:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
<hr style="width:50%;">
:'''<span style="color:Chocolate;">Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached</span>'''<br/><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, {{{1|] (]) 19:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)}}}</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->

==== Nintendo ====
*] to ]
*] to ]
*] to ]
*] to ]
Per such discussions as the one below.--] 14:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' No "Nintendo" Wii? That would seem to go along with the rest of them. ] (]) 23:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
:*Unlike the other consoles, "Nintendo" does not appear to be part of the name "]". I think "play the Wii" is more correct than "play Wii", as in the article. –] 01:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
::*Definitely not "Nintendo Wii.'''--] 14:10, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
<hr style="width:50%;">
:'''<span style="color:Chocolate;">Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached</span>'''<br/><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, {{{1|] (]) 19:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)}}}</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->
*I have an idea- Why don't we just go with the article name for all these game categories? ] (]) 19:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

==== Category:Wikipedians by number of edits ====
''(Relisted due to additional tagging 2 days into the discussion) - ] 19:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC)''

*'''Delete''' ]
**'''Delete''' ]
**'''Merge''' ] to ]
**'''Merge''' ] to ]
**'''Merge''' ] to ]
**'''Merge''' ] to ]
**'''Merge''' ] to ]
**'''Merge''' ] to ]
**'''Merge''' ] to ]
**'''Merge''' ] to ]
**'''Merge''' ] to ]

Note: "...5,000 edits" has already been deleted as empty by ]. - ] 22:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
:'''Note 2:''' Now all target categories listed, as well as ], ], ], and ] have been tagged with the proposition to delete all edit count categories being brought up. ] (]) 19:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

*'''Merge and Delete''' as listed above, as nominator. - ] 22:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete ], ], and all subcategories''' in each except for ]. These edit count categories are essentially useless, and have been without a DRV overturning the deletion since (so these are technically speedyable). If no consensus for this, merge as nominated (and delete all empty categories in ] as well as ], which is nearly all-inclusive. ] (]) 00:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Nuke from high orbit, burn at the stake, stomp and piss on the ashes,''' then delete. <span style="color:red;font-weight:bold">^</span>]<sup></span>]]</sup>&nbsp;<em style="font-size:10px;">00:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC)</em>
*'''Delete''' promotes a bad thing. ''']''' ('']'' | '']'') 00:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' I've been waiting a while for this nomination, but I didn't have the guts to do it myself. All Wikipedians are equal, even if some have more edits than others. :) ]] 20:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - Note: Since the target categories are not tagged, they won't be deleted as a result of this discussion. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*:I've tagged the remaining categories. ] (]) 03:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*::Ok, I've relisted, since it's gone beyond the first day of discussion. - ] 19:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete all'''. Perhaps some useful purpose can be offered for ranking Wikipedians on number of edits, but I don't see it. Cred and staus in the Misplaced Pages community shouldn't be a matter of raw number of edits. --] 09:14, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


===May 31===
====]====
Nonsense babel category. "These users wish to speak Inuktitut". Essentially a 0-level category, since this is for people who don't speak the language at all. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as nom. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. --] 18:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - Perhaps I am misreading it, but it would seem that this category is for those "who wish to speak", not for those "who wish they could speak". So it's ''not'' a 0-level category. It sounds more like it's their preference to speak it. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
**In that case, it is still useless (unless we want one of these for every language preference people have) and shouldn't be in the babel system at minimum. ] (]) 19:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

====]====
"A category for people who feel that they don't have a completed userpage. Yet." - We don't need a category for this. Nobody is going to have a reason to go looking for userpages that are under construction. Looks like the category was created simply for the sake of being associated with the template. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as nom. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - I've noticed these templates to be categorized for some time before this category was even made. The previous category for these templates was ], which even included these userpages, and so an alternative catergory was made in order to clean up the category a bit. Does this mean that the userpages should be moved back to the original category, or should we prevent these templates to be categorized in any way at all? ] 23:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - Userpages under construction have no need to be categorized, with the possible exception of drafts of articles (] contains some of these). So the template {{tl|User page construction}} should not categorize any userpages at all, because there's no navigational value in grouping together "incomplete" userpages - who'd want to look at them? –] 23:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - Noting this ], which seems to be similar in context. However, I don't ser this as a recreation, by any means. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' since techincally ''all Misplaced Pages'', including user pages, are currently "under construction" by definition of the wiki. If no connsensus to delete, consider a '''Merge''' to ]. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
**'''Just Delete''', as I'm pretty sure that having an userpage under construction doesn't tell that would the user actually need any help, and the purpose of the template would also become very misleading. ] 21:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

====]====
====]====
====]====
====]====
====]====
====]====
"These users would like to be able to speak more languages", "This user would like to be able to speak many more languages", etc. etc. Knowing who wants to speak more languages is not useful to Misplaced Pages at all. The only possible useful one is the last one, stating "This user is a professional translator of one or more languages". It isn't all that helpful without knowing what languages they translate, however, and such a category shouldn't be in the babel system if deemed keepable.
*'''Delete all''' except possibly the last one, which would need a rename to something like ] as nom. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete all''' and '''merge''' ] to ] as they have the exact same scope. –] 23:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
**Good idea. ] (]) 03:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Merge all''' to ], except ], which should instead be merged to ]. I think knowing that someone wants to learn how to speak more languages ''is'' useful, and at the very least shows interest in languages. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*:Does such a category belong in the babel system though? At least move it to ] or something (even though I still fail to see how such a category would be useful). ] (]) 03:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*::I totally agree with a rename. How about renaming to ]. (Due to potential for abuse/divisiveness, "wish" is probably not a good word to use in Wikipedian category names.) - ] 19:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

====]====
====]====
====]====
====]====
====]====
Don't need categories for this invented language. There will never be a Misplaced Pages written in ], nobody will ever have a use for going through such categories to find people. ] does not currently exist, but this should set precedent for that category as well. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete all''' as nom. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete all''' - per ], this is a ], and not a language at all. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Qryrgr nyy''' cre abz. –] 03:06, 1 Whar 2007 (HGP)
*'''Delete all'''. As noted, this is not a language, but a cipher. There are not, nor will there ever be (I hope), Misplaced Pages pages written in ROT13. Klingon or Quenya, perhaps. ROT13, no. Makes a fine userbox (in line with the ones about ], ], and ]), but not a category. --] 09:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

===May 30===
==== ] ====
:'''Rename''' ] to ] - Following "Lists of..." naming convention. - ] 22:36, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

*'''Rename''' as nominator. - ] 22:36, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' per nom. –] 00:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' per nom. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

====]====
'''Delete''' as redundant to ], which is used to disambiguate against ]. –] 16:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. Looks redundant. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as ambiguous. ''''']]]''''' <small>]</small> 02:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete with reservation'''. Needlessly reduplicative redundancy is a bad thing, even to the point of not being good, and should be deleted and removed. I will, however, accept this category as a supercategory containing ] and ] -- then it would serve as a the category equivalent of a disambig page. Otherwise, it must go. --] 09:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

====]====
Nonsense babel category level, only whole numbers please. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' or merge to 1-level cat as nominator. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' and the user can choose which subcat of ] they wish to be in. –] 00:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', per ] and ]. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

====]====
Nonsense babel category level, only whole numbers please. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' or merge to 2 or 3-level cat as nominator. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - The template can categorize users into level 2, as that appears to be the closest level of proficiency. –] 00:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Merge''' to level 2. ''''']]]''''' <small>]</small> 02:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', per ] and ]. - ] 03:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

====]====
No 6-level categories, please. Says the same exact thing for 5-level, and should be merged. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Merge''' to ] as nominator. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Merge''' - professorial is professional, unless I'm missing something. –] 00:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Merge''' - Except for different colors, means pretty much the same thing. -- ] ] 00:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as author. The command of the English language exhibited by some of the so-called "professionals" sporting ] is sorely lacking. &nbsp; — ] <span class="plainlinksneverexpand">(]&#124;])</span> 14:11, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
**Misplaced Pages can't police user cats to determine who actually belongs in what category, and the solution isn't to continually make higher and higher babel level categories based on the personal opinion that people in the previous level don't qualify. You are also arguing that this be the only 6-level babel category allowed, what makes this so special? ] (]) 19:04, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I write articles off-Wiki for teaching purposes on the nuts and bolts of English (TEFL). There'll be plenty of others around here who can make similar claims. ] 15:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
**This doesn't explain how the 5-level category wouldn't suffice. ] (]) 19:04, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
***The groups don't compare the same things. En-4 is about familiarity/comfort. En-5 is about social context. En-6 is about depth/breadth of knowledge.] 21:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Having En-5 is redundant enough; there is no need for more of this nonsense. What's next, En-7, "academician level"? En-8, "inventor of the English language"?—]&nbsp;•&nbsp;(]); 19:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - What the other 5 ''mean'' may need to be redefined (and so, arguing whether 5 is different than 6 is pointless). But, do not create 6th level babel cats, if you please. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. We don't need to start promoting grade inflation in the Babel boxes. If people are breaking the system by overstating their proficiency in English (as the author suggests above), then we need to change the system in a basic way, not apply this kind of Band-aid. --] 09:28, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

==== ] ====
Classic "not" category. Categorizing by things we don't own does not help Misplaced Pages in any way. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as nom. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - The category text implies that these users are interested in ], but that's not necessarily the case given the userbox text. –] 00:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - The ubx was modelled on the <nowiki>{{</nowiki>User Sustainable Living<nowiki>}}</nowiki> ubx. The green background and earth were meant to signify interest in ]. --] 20:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*If '''Rename''' is a permissible vote, I so vote, else my vote is '''Delete'''. My problem isn't so much with the category itself as the negative and indirect framing of the category name. If we're going to categorise Wikipedians, the meaning of the categorisation should be affirmative and direct, not based on the implications of the category. And ideally as short as possible. '''Category:Carless Wikipedians''' or '''Category:Wikipedians who practise sustainable living''' would be good by me, but not the name the category currently holds. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]){{#if:1 June 2007|&#32;1 June 2007|}}.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
**"Carless Wikipedians" would still be a "not" category. ] (]) 01:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
***I'm not so sure; there are ''not''s and ''not''s. It seems to me a little simplistic to say "The name contains a negator (e.g. ''non''- or -''less'') and the category is therefore a 'not'-category." '''Category:Non-redhead Wikipedians''' is unacceptable on its face; '''Category:Wikipedians who practise non-western medicine''' is clearly acceptable. And does either its (approximate) synonymy with '''Category:Wikipedians who do not enjoy sex''' or the negator ''a''- render '''Category:Asexual Wikipedians''' invalid? If one becomes listed under '''Category:Carless Wikipedians''' it is because one has made a point of not owning a car, either by manually categorising oneself or by using a template that automatically does so (that is, it is an opt-in category); so the category becomes limited to those who do not drive cars for an articulable reason. A similar argument applies to non-smokers. If there is, for example, an articulable difference between "non-smokers" and "people who do not smoke" (and I feel there is -- that "non-smokers" have made a conscious choice to reject smoking whereas "people who do not smoke" may simply have never taken up the habit), then it's not quite so obvious that '''Category:Non-smoking Wikipedians''' is a ''not''-category. I'm not arguing against avoiding ''not''-categories, just against using that principle as a mechanical <!-- was "mindlessly binding", but I switched to cooler language -- ] --> rule rather than a guideline that alerts us to cases that then must be judged on their own merits.
****--] 08:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*****We allow some "not" categories, but only ones that are beneficial to the encyclopedia. For instance, ]. The whole reasoning behind having the "not" category rule is that not categories almost always do not help Misplaced Pages in any way. For instance, it does not help Misplaced Pages in any way to know who does not own a car, or who does not smoke. It doesn't help Misplaced Pages to know who consciously made the decision to not smoke. It does, on the other hand, help to know who is interested in topics that have enough articles for such people to collaborate on. If a "not" category can help Misplaced Pages, then I wouldn't mind it existing, and I don't think categories are mechanically nominated just because they are a not category. The whole purpose of user categories is to improve the encyclopedia, which I believe this category does not, under any name. ] (]) 18:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
******Very well, then. If what you're saying is that utility to Misplaced Pages is the criterion for distinguishing a ''not'' worthy of keeping from a ''not'' worthy of deletion, then there's no further need to discuss the ''not'' question here -- lack of utility to Misplaced Pages is a stronger and more interesting objection that can justify deletion on its own. --] 18:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - There is a ] category. Is that a "Classic 'not' category"? I'm just trying to understand the rules. --] 01:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
**It is definitely a "not" category by my definition. Unfortunately when I nominated that for deletion last, it ended in no consensus for some reason. We really don't need to categorize people who don't smoke, and have been considering a renomination of that soon. ] (]) 01:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Neutral''' - i don't own a car so i won't care if i don't own a userbox. -- ] - <small>]</small> 02:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
**Please see the notification box at the top of the page. This discussion is only about the category, not the userbox. The userbox will be kept. ] (]) 02:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*<s>'''Provisional Keep'''</s> '''Rename if possible, else Delete''' - I'm also having the same problem understanding what is wrong with this userbox. Exactly what policy or guideline is it violating? I also have the userboxes for non-smoker, non-drinker, drug-free, and atheist, all of which are "not" categories. If a userbox must "help Misplaced Pages" then how does, for example, a userbox listing what university you attend help Misplaced Pages? Show me the basis for this deletion request and then I may change my vote. -- ] 02:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
**First and formost, please see the notification box at the top of the page. This discussion is only about the category, not the userbox. The userbox will be kept. Second of all, there is (rightly) no category associated with drug-free wikipedians (category was deleted here a while back) or for alcohol-free wikipedians. Athiest counts as a religion category, and is not considered a "not" category. The non-smoking category can be explained with ], and the category should be deleted. As for "how does, for example, a userbox listing what university you attend help Misplaced Pages?" Users with such categories can reasonably be expected to collaborate on topics relating to the university. There is no article titled ] or anything similar, so there is nothing for such users to collaborate on. If the intent of this category is for people who support sustainable living, they are free to join ]. ] (]) 02:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
***I didn't ask for an explanation of the ] category. I merely asked, "Is that a 'Classic "not" category'?" Ditto, the ] category. As for alcohol and drug-free Wikipedians there is the ] category. --] 05:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
****OK, I somehow missed the difference between "category" and "userbox" before. I have to agree with 7Kim above though, being a "not" category isn't a good reason to delete a category. As I mentioned earlier, "atheist Wikipedians" is a "not" category, because it lists people who do not believe in gods. However, there is ''utility'' to the "atheist" category. Still, one could ask, "What's next? Wikipedians who don't believe in Santa Claus?" You can see why that argument fails, just because some "not" categories are ridiculous does not mean there are no "not" categories that can be useful. If a more useful category for "car-free Wikipedians" could be used instead then it should be renamed to that category, if not, then delete it. -- ] 12:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. a "not" category. What's next, ]? <span style="font-family:serif;">&mdash;]✰]</span> 02:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - "not-category", with (imho) only tenuous ties to eco-issues. - ] 03:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' - Following the logic of the ] category I propose renaming the category as "'''Car-free Wikipedians'''" or, alternatively, "'''Wikipedians who support the car-free movement'''." This would link the category to the ] article and to a movement that exists external to the Misplaced Pages community. Car-free Wikipedians could reasonably be expected to be interested in collaborating on the ] article and some of the several related articles listed in its "See also" section. Does this solve the problem? --] 06:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
**The logic for creating ] would be the same as the straight-edge Wikipedian category, as there are a few articles such people in the category could reasonably be expected to collaborate on. I don't think, however, that a rename of this category would work, since I doubt all current members of the category support the movement. You could make a new category, though. ] (]) 09:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
**Those categories are all essentially the same thing as "I don't drive a car." If you want to categorized Wikipedians by transport, don't categorize them by what they don't use. Categorize them by what they ''do'' use, for example, ].<span style="font-family:serif;">&mdash;]✰]</span> 15:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - Okay, I'm going to create "Car-free Wikipedians" and modify the ubx to add users to that category. I'll drop the ] stuff. I've already notified, on their talk pages, all of the users using the ubx that there is an ongoing discussion about deleting the category the box is associated with. --] 10:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
**Please give this discussion at least a few more days before spinning off an exact clone of the category under discussion here. "Car-free Wikipedians" means exactly the same thing as "Wikipedians who don't own automobiles". <span style="font-family:serif;">&mdash;]✰]</span> 15:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
***"Car-free Wikipedians" is definitely not "an exact clone of the category under discussion here." It follows the logic of the ] category and links the category to the ] article and to a movement that exists external to the Misplaced Pages community. --] 21:47, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
**May I suggest something that obviates the "not" objection we keep hearing? '''Category:Wikipedians who use public transit''' would do so nicely. --] 18:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
***Agreed, "Car-free" Wikipedians still means wikipeidians who don't own a car, whereas "Wikipedians who support the car-free movement" is a different type of category and would work along the lines of the Straight-Edge Wikipedians cat. (I still don't think we should have categories for Wikipedians who support/oppose anything, but that is a different debate alltogether). Ideally I'd like this to be renamed to ] if kept. ] (]) 18:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - The rationale for avoiding "not" categories goes back over months of discussions. Essentially the idea is: 1.) We should avoid all-inclusive categories. 2.) 2 categories covering the same topic (differing in one is positive and the other negative) would together be essentially "all-inclusive". 3.) Therefore one of the two should be deleted. 4.) typically the "negative" (also known as the "not"-based category) should be deleted, since the positive is more likely to be useful for positive collaboration (whether direct or indirect), and the negative form is more likely to be divisive or inflammatory. - Therefore, since we have ] and ], one of them should be deleted, and in this case, it's clearly the negative form. It doesn't matter if we call it "Car-free", or whatever, it's still the negative form, or in other words, a "not" category, and so it should be deleted. I hope this helps clarify. - ] 19:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' This is worth exactly what you all paid for it, but I would suggest that the ''not''-ness of a category should not be viewed as cause for deletion in and of itself, but as a flag that alerts us that other reasons for deletion may exist. Looking back over history, it seems to me that categories labelled as ''not''s, when deleted, have always had other arguments against them -- lack of Wiki-utility, redundancy, divisiveness, silliness, irrelevance, overly broad scope, &c. In editing, the use of passive voice is not itself bad, but extensive use of passive voice serves as a good predictor for the presence of weasel words, unsourced assertions, and POV problems. So too with category management -- a negatively framed category title or definition is not itself bad, but serves as a good predictor of a valid cause for deletion. --] 19:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy delete''' - The category is empty--] 00:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

====]====
Useless category. Does anyone ''not'' support the development of renewable energy? Might as well have a category for people who support improved health care, improved human rights, etc. Also, "Renewable Energy" should not be capitalized, so at least needs a rename. I'd also support a rename to ].
*'''Delete''' or rename to ] as nom. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' to ] as a large topic of interest. –] 00:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' to ] - says essentially the same thing, while being potentiallly less divisive. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' to ] - more appropriate and a large topic with potential to interest many. ] 11:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - Now that I think of it, ] might be a slightly better name. Thoughts? ] (]) 19:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' to ]. '''Wikipedians interested in ...''' seems to be a more well-established convention than '''Wikipedians who support ...''', preferable due to divisiveness issues, and safe from the vagueness surrounding the meaning of "support". --] 19:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

===May 28===
==== Category:WikiProject Irish Music participants ====
:{{lc|WikiProject Irish Music participants}}
:'''''Merge''' into ], duplicate.'' -- <i>] <sup>]</sup></i> 01:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Procedural comment''' shouldn't this be a user cats for discussion? ] 20:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Moved''' from ]. --] <small>] • (])</small> 19:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Ask WikiProject to decide on one, then speedy merge''' - This goes back to the members vs. participants debate. The best way to deal with this is ask the WikiProject which they prefer. ] (]) 23:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Reverse merge''' to "...participants". (Yes, ask the WikiProject, but, I still prefer that "members" be removed.) - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

===May 27===
==== Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Queen's University ====
:'''Propose renaming''' ] to ]
:'''Nominator's Rationale:''' {{{3|'''Rename''', To differentiate ] from ] in Canada. ] 16:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC)}}}
*'''Note''' moved from ]. --] <small>] • (])</small> 18:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''rename/speedy rename''' per nom. ] (]) 23:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

===May 26===
====]====
"Local" varies for every person on Misplaced Pages, so as is, this category is essentially useless for collaborative purposes. A way to salvage it would be to make it in to a parent category and change the name to ], and have subcategories for each city. Unfortunately, we we would have to ask everyone in the category which city's local history they are interested in to determine this, so I don't know if this is salvagable. As is, this category is no more useful than if someone just wrote they were interested in local history on their userpage. "Local History" shouldn't be capitalized, so this at minimum needs a rename.
*'''Neutral''' pending more discussion, but leaning towards delete. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Strong Delete''' - At first I was thinking that this could be kept ''if'' the inclusion criteria involved local culture and society in general as sociological items. However, it's clear from the category introduction that this is not the case. This merely duplicates every "Wikipedian by location" category into one sprawling category which is potentially all-inclusive. - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. This just isn't useful unless it provides a means for finding Wikipedians interested in the history of some particular locality. Which is an interesting idea, but I don't see the possibility of it without building and filling a perfectly gargantuan category tree. Even then, how local one can go without passing the notability horizon is not an argument I care to be present for. --] 19:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

====]====
This category became more or less obsolete when ] came along. I don't think this category was useful at any point time, but It certainly isn't useful now. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*Delete, not particularly useful any more. The "]" is over, nothing more to end. ] ] 02:40, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - Some may consider ] to be a continuation of the "boxwar". I'm going to be semi-cliche and suggest that if this is deleted, so too should all Wikipedian by Misplaced Pages issue categories, else it should not be deleted. - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

====]====
Not something Misplaced Pages needs a category for. I'm sure everyone supports the revival of various things, but having categories for such things will not improve the encyclopedia. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' or at least rename to "Wikipedians who listen to..." - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

====]====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''speedy delete at author's request'''. ] 11:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

"The wikipedians who have joined ]". Sorry, we don't need categories for unofficial userspace groups. Similar categories have been deleted many times in the past. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - Premature. If this "group" survives in Misplaced Pages: space, ''then'' such a category might be useful. - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page, if any, or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

====]====
====]====
{{ct}} '''speedy delete.'''--] 11:16, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
0-level category. Mass deleted . Listing for another admin to verify, since this specific one hasn't been deleted before. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy delete''' as nom. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Note''' - Added ], which also needs deletion. ] (]) 07:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
{{cb}}

=== May 25 ===

====]====

Does not aid collaboration in any way. At all. Also, wasn't something like this deleted before? – ] 15:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - I think all these autograph pages should be deleted. They are all a waste of space and people's time. However, until that happens, a category to group them all might not be a bad idea (in order to make it easier for a group MfD). ] (]) 19:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
::Please see ]. ] ] 00:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' The category helps autograph pages to become shorter in that they don't need to include a list of autograph pages anymore. ] ] 00:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
**'''Comment''' They never ''needed'' to in the first place. It's only been part of autograph pages because some people have chosen to do that to further their <s>inappropriate use of Misplaced Pages</s> socialization. ] 00:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' with extreme prejudice. Misplaced Pages is not your high school yearbook. ] 00:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Strong delete''', utterly and completely useless, unless this is some sort of holding pen so we can delete them all at once later. Why on earth would we categorize unencyclopedic user subpages? --] <small>]</small> 01:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - I suppose that I could note that ] signs such pages, and supports their use, but instead I think I'll simply point out that this discussion is about the category, ''not'' whether you support having such pages on Misplaced Pages. Oh, and keep because: If we've got 'em, then grouping 'em as a sub-cat of ] would seem to make sense. - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep and rename''' to ]. This serves as a useful ] because the autograph pages in it are often discussed. –] 20:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - per Sean William. We don't need to go as far as adding on a category to these useless subpages. I imagine the only use for it (besides tracking them) would be for these users to find random users' pages to sign (as they often seem to do). ] 00:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', a category that shouldn't contain anything anyway. <span style="font-family:serif;">&mdash;]✰]</span> 03:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

====]====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''delete'''. ] (]) 09:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

No possible collaborative use; ] a webhost or social networking site. (])<sup>(])</sup> 11:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
:*'''Delete''' this is essentially a NOT category (and don't come down here saying this helps collaboration on feminism).--] 18:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - "This lists Wikipedians who are against female haircutting" - Sorry, we don't need a category for this. ] (]) 19:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - This is a major issue in some countries of the world, as well as some religious sects/groups/whatever. However, I can't tell if this is the intent of the category, or just a category of those who find long hair on women attractive, and are opposed to it being cut. '''Keep''' if the former is true, else '''Delete''' if the latter is true. - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
**If that were the case (which there is no indication of either way), this category would still need a rename, so deletion looks like the best option. ] (]) 09:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

====]====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''speedy delete''' per previous consensus on admins per country categories. ] ] 02:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

This one must have slipped through the cracks of the Administrators by country UCFD a while back. In either case, I think that established enough precedent for this to be speedyable. ] (]) 02:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy delete''' as nom. ] (]) 02:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Should have been deleted with the others. Doesn't help build the encyclopedia, we don't need to subcategorise admins by nationality. <span style="font-family: Verdana">]]</span> 02:30, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:Audio file editors ====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Speedy Rename''' - ] 10:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

:'''Speedy Rename''' ] to ] - added Wikipedians and re-arrange order. - ] 08:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy rename''' feel free to close. ] (]) 00:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

===May 24===

====]====
Rename to ] for proper capitalisation.
*'''Rename''' As nominator &mdash; ]</font>] <small>(a.k.a ''Tellyaddict'')</small> 15:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. It does not appear to help the project in any way. --] 11:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - A potential to collaborate on a single article is not worth having a category. Rename if no consensus to delete. ] (]) 19:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' to ] - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' to ] -- (]<sub>]</sub><sup><span style="position: relative; left: -16px; margin-right: -16px;">]</span></sup>) 00:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - If you go to the article, it appears as if "gedit" is the proper capitalization (lowercase G and no capital E) so if renamed, needs to be renamed to ]. ] (]) 10:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

===May 23===

====]====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''speedy deleted''' per creator request below. ] (]) 23:34, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Can't be true, does not help Misplaced Pages in any way. Categories like these are in the essay on what categories not to make. ] (]) 23:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 23:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete:''' Didn't know it was frowned upon. '''<span style="font-size:95%;font-variant:small-caps;font-family:Trebuchet MS"><font color="#229922">]</font></span>''' ] 23:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', non-useful category. ''''']]''''' 23:23, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

===May 21===

==== Sony PlayStation ====
*Relisting these to discuss whether "Sony" should be used, and about how (if wanted) to disambiguate between general PlayStation users and those who use the ] (and the ]). - ] 23:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
**'''Rename''' ] to ]
**'''Rename''' ] to ]
**'''Rename''' ] to ]

*'''Neutral''' - hoping for more discussion. - ] 23:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Just PlayStation, please.''' I work with Sony guys, and even they don't call it the Sony PlayStation.--] 23:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
**Though I could get behind changing the PlayStation category to "Wikipedians who play PSone games", since it has definitely been overwritten in users' minds.--] 14:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Include Sony''', without it we have a sentence containing "play play", which is obnoxious. --] <small>]</small> 04:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
*There's no need to disambiguate for PlayStation in general (broad/unnecessary overlap; subcats do the job), nor for an empty ] (overcategorization for only 3 subcats). –] 07:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

===May 19===
==== ] ====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Delete''' - ] 19:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Can't possibly categorize all past accounts that have been used for vandalism. Attempting to maintain such a category would be futile. This is nonsense. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Impossibly large scope, and doesn't sound right besides &mdash; we don't want there to be accounts ''for'' vandalism. ] 08:29, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. --] 12:51, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' → WP:SNOW ;-) There is no use for this cat. <i><b>]] <sup><small>]</small></sup>]</b></i> 22:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - See ]. We may need more information about this one. - ] 00:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
:*If a user is in that category and they are posted to AIV, the bot will mention that the user is in the category. Should have no effect whatsoever on this debate. <small><sup><font color="#000">]</font><font color="#c20">]</font><font color="#000">]</font></sup></small><!-- Was HighInBC --> 01:35, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', ]. <span style="font-family:serif;">&mdash;]✰]</span> 02:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', immense scope! Don't need it. ''''']]''''' 23:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - may encourage users to vandalise a page, and per above comments. –]]<span style="font-family:Lucida Console;"> ~</span> 03:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== ] ====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Delete''' - ] 19:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

User category that added people to a ] group. Not useful to Misplaced Pages at all. Once again, I'll say that stuff like this should be speedyable. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' → per nom ;-) <i><b>]] <sup><small>]</small></sup>]</b></i> 22:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - Vanity category, among other reasons. - ] 00:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', per above. ''''']]''''' 23:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

====]====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''speedy delete''' per creator request below. ] (]) 07:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Does not help Misplaced Pages in any way I can think of. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Category fits me to a glove, but it doesn't do wikipedia any good. --] 08:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' → No, I cannot figure how this category can help. <i><b>]] <sup><small>]</small></sup>]</b></i> 22:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy delete''' as creator: I have since read ] and have learned that userboxes should not by default create categories. ''Mea culpa'' --] 07:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== ] ====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Delete''' - ] 22:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Do we want a category like this for every game show or talk show ever made? I don't see this being any more useful than its parent category, ]. I suppose it's possible such people saw some behind-the-scenes stuff, but adding any info they got from first-hand experience to articles would qualify as original research. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Upmerge''' as nominator. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Upmerge''' → It's not necessary that somebody who were in Jeopardy! studio audience still likes it, but we can assume it. <i><b>]] <sup><small>]</small></sup>]</b></i> 22:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - Except perhaps ] or ], being in the audience of a game show is about as notable as attending any performance/concert. As for the rename suggestion, being in the audience doesn't necessarily mean that they like the game show. - ] 00:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
**Deletion is fine by me. ] (]) 07:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== ] ====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Merge''' to ] - ] 19:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Redundant to the correctly-named ]. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Upmerge/speedy upmerge''' as nominator. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy merge'''. –] 08:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy merge''' → NCCAT, not controversial. <i><b>]] <sup><small>]</small></sup>]</b></i> 22:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== ] ====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Keep''' as ] to developers, I suppose? : ) - ] 19:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

We don't need one of these for all 10,000 bug reports on BugZilla. Will become obsolete once it is fixed, anyway, and this category won't provide any benefit until then. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*As the ] for this category, I'll be sorry to see it go. This isn't just any ol' bug, but probably one of the biggest current sources of frustration for those of us that spend significant time battling Misplaced Pages vandalism. This little bit of wiki-] was meant to simply inform other users about this issue (I bet 98% of regular editors still don't know about this bug) and encourage our noble developers on their pathway towards a solution. At least it managed to pick up a little bit of attention. In any case, I'm sure this cat will be deleted, and for perfectly valid reasons...but I won't pretend to like it! <small>Sigh.</small> &mdash; ]'']'' 08:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' until bug is fixed. Scientizzle is right that this isn't "any ol' bug". Because of this bug, warning IP users for vandalism serves virtually no purpose since most IP users are not getting the messages. The problem is that most users on Misplaced Pages still don't know that this bug is preventing them from being able to communicate with IPs. This category was created to try to ''"get the word out"'' that there is a problem with this and that most IPs are not receiving messages they sent. I understand if the category is deleted but that doesn't mean that I will try other ways to inform people. -- ] ] 08:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
:*I'm fully aware of the bug and its effects. I don't see how increasing people's awareness of it any more will make the bug get fixed any faster. Every single Wikipedian could be in this category and I doubt it would make a difference, I'm sure the developers are working on it and the amount of people in this category isn't going to affect their speed. I also don't like the precedent this sets- Allowing a category like this for all bug reports on BugZilla (or at least all unsolved ones). Yes, this is more severe than most, but setting the threshhold for what is category-worthy or not is subjective. I also ''really'' don't like the temporary nature of this. I don't like the idea of any Wikipedian category that is expected to be obsolete within a few weeks or a couple months at most. ] (]) 08:47, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' ]. The bug report links to this user category to express the users' attitude. It'd look ridiculous when they come here to see it deleted. –] 08:34, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*:Not really, nobody looking at the bug report will work any faster because they see this category nor will they find it ridiculous if the category is deleted. {{unsigned|Yonatan}}
*'''Delete''' - ridiculous category, serves no purpose and doesn't help anybody. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:26, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - After reading the comments above, I wonder if I should mention that the userbox won't be deleted due to this discussion... - ] 00:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Worthy category until Bug ID 9213 is resolved, then should be deleted forthwith (but I'm sure even the creator would agree with me on that one). ] 09:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - Trying alternative ways to get problems fixed to make this project better is ok in my book. ] 01:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

* I perfectly understand and support the reasons for setting up this category. (And yes, I had forgotten about the bug again... and I'm currently trying to contact an IP, so I'm glad about the reminder.) And if it should help in the least to indicate to the developers that this is seen as a priority by many Wikipedians--all the better. I'm sure they have a lot to do, so it's a good idea to indicate the priorities that current users request. (And no, I don't care whether a category is set up for a day or a century. If it's useful when it's there and doesn't cause too much trouble to set it up and delete it--what's the problem?) Nonetheless, I also have to agree with the argument that this would set a precedent. And we'd soon have so many categories that the purpose (pointing out a major issue) would be made impossible to reach once the word spreads and users rally friends and sock puppets to send their favorite bug category to the top of the charts... For this reason, I hope this discussion will drag on a bit more, raise a lot of awareness... and end with the '''deletion''' of the category. Mission accomplished. --] 01:56, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' This bug is pretty bad. (I'd support a cat for maybe ] too, but not the majority of bugs there.) I agree that this should be deleted if and when the bug is fixed, but the devs don't seem sure what's causing it. And awareness of the bug is good to avoid ] anons too. (Disclosure: I ''think'' it was me who reported the bug, but I'm not sure (''/me checks: yes, it was me'').) I'd add myself to the cat if I were the sort of user who used user cats. (Note that there is a method of 'voting' for a bug on Bugzilla, where you add your email address as a 'vote'; I'm not sure if the devs pay attention to it.) --] 14:14, 26 May 2007 (]]])
**By the way, I am aware that deleting a user cat has no effect on the presence or absence of an associated userbox. --] 16:55, 28 May 2007 (]]])
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== ] and ] ====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Deleted''' as empty by ]. (And kind of hard to merge an empty category : ) - ] 22:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

In this case, the former was a subcat of the latter. As these are redundant, they should be merged one into the other.
*'''Merge''' as nom. ''''']]]''''' 04:14, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Merge/speedy merge''' to ] as the other cats use the comma. Looks uncontroversial. ] (]) 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy merge''' → For now, for NCCAT, merge to the 5,000 one. However, I prefer the one without the comma as it's international. But I think that if somebody want to change the convention, he/she should make a group nom (I will probably do one of this days ;-) ). <i><b>]] <sup><small>]</small></sup>]</b></i> 22:12, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
*:I agree. How about if this one is withdrawn, and we just proceed with the group nomination? - ] 00:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC) - ] 00:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

*'''Move Both''' As per a recent mass-merger of edit-counting templates these two categories and all other subcategories of ] should be migrated to ] and its existing subcategories. ] 01:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Merge to ].''' We don't have the "over" construction.--] 11:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:Wikipedians who like Zoo Tycoon ====
{{ct}} '''rename'''.--] 15:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
:'''Speedy Rename''' ] to ]. --] 07:56, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy merge''' per nom. ] (]) 07:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
{{cb}}

===May 18===
====]====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} speedy delete, redundant. ] ] 01:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Redundant with the properly named ]. ] (]) 01:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Merge/speedy merge''' as nominator. ] (]) 01:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Speedy merge''' as redundant. ''''']]]''''' 01:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== ] ====
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''
The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''No consensus to delete''' - '''Rename''' to ]. (The article suggests it's a personal computer rather than a video game console.) - ] 19:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

"This category describes those who consider themselves to be fans of the Sinclair ZX Spectrum computer" - Wha? This is nonsense. No indication it is even a user category, so at minimum needs a rename, but even then this would have no benefit to the encyclopedia. ] (]) 01:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 01:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Seems like a nonsense category, its not helping the encyclopedia in any way. &mdash; ]</font>] 15:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' (and possibly rename by prepending "Wikipedian"): as the description indicates, it's a badge category by which those involved in the ] pages identify one another, and as such it's no more "nonsensical" or unhelpful than, say, ... ] 13:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
**'''Possible move (rename) to''' Wikipedians who play ZX Spectrum, as per '''Wikipedians by video game console''' below. ] 13:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', albeit possibly renamed to make it clearer (although I like "Spec-chum") --] 14:50, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' to ] per ]. - ] 00:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

]

Latest revision as of 02:23, 3 February 2022

Redirect to:

This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:
  • From a merge: This is a redirect from a page that was merged into another page. This redirect was kept in order to preserve the edit history of this page after its content was merged into the content of the target page. Please do not remove the tag that generates this text (unless the need to recreate content on this page has been demonstrated) or delete this page.
  • From a subpage: This is a redirect from a subpage. In a page title, a subpage name appears after a forward slash (/); for example, "Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Cricket/Articles", which is a subpage of "Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Cricket", redirects to Template:CricketRecentChanges. Not all articles or other pages with "/" in their titles are subpages (e.g. CP/M).
When appropriate, protection levels are automatically sensed, described and categorized.