The result of the debate was rename. Conscious 13:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Acronym to full title; DARPA might be commonly used, but lets not go by the example of the U.S. military (plus, the article uses the full title). Paul 23:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Non-conformance with "by country" categorization conventions as stated above. — May. 28, '06 [05:38] < freak| talk>
The result of the debate was merge/delete (empty). Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) Category is empty and unused; distinction not a useful one between this and Category:Airports in Ontario (what constitutes "historical"?). At very least naming conventions dictate that it should be renamed to Historical airports in Ontario, but I think it would be better to just delete. BoojiBoy 22:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Edit: Just discovered it's a duplicate of Category:Historical airports in Ontario. Can this be speedied? BoojiBoy 22:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge to Category:Star Wars fandom. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Contains only one article. Unlikely to be useful. Lkjhgfdsa 22:08, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was keep. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
This category was brought to my attention in the recent CFD debate (in which I voted to keep.) On review, I think the category should be moved to match up with the others in Category:Deaths by cause — ie. Category:Hangings instead of Category:Deaths by rope and Category:Deaths by drowning instead of Category:Deaths by water. I'm aware this nomination is a bit soon after the Deletion vote closure but I figure this is a slightly different process, and I'm likely to forget this if I don't put it up now. GeeJo (t)⁄ (c) • 20:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename per nom. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Move acronym to full title Paul 19:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Only includes Category:Ice hockey statistics which is listed under Category:Ice hockey. Vegaswikian 19:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Rename - A "fictional work" would be a Story within a story; but obviously this category is meant for works of fiction (not fictional works) about ancient Egypt. MakeRocketGoNow 17:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
It's the only member of Category:American musicians by state not using the state name without the possesive. Vegaswikian 17:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
This is somewhat of a re-nomination from November 4 that did not reach a consensus. This category name is currently ambiguous, and is proposed for renaming so that its naming convention matches Category:Multinational companies, and Category:Multinational companies headquartered in Hong Kong. Kurieeto 17:08, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The suggested new name would match the extant category:Railway stations serving airports in the United Kingdom. While the "in the United Kingdom" might seem unnecessary as category is already a sub-cat of category:Railway stations in the United Kingdom I'm sure there are railway stations that serve ports and harbours in other parts of the world. Thryduulf 15:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Proposed for renaming to match the naming convention of Category:Gardens in the United States, as well as the naming convention of all Category:Botanical gardens in the United States sub-cats, including Category:Botanical gardens in Florida. Kurieeto 15:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Proposal is to rename:
To conform to the naming convention of " Category:Disasters in the United States" and its sub-cats like Category:Transportation disasters in the United States. Kurieeto 15:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
In hindsight, I believe the organisation (i.e. British Army) should be specified to conform with Category:British Army regiments, Category:British Army battalions, etc.. SoLando ( Talk) 15:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Practice on Wiki is to differentiate field hockey from ice hockey. Most field hockey articles and categories include the "field" disambiguation, see Category:Field hockey clubs, Category:Field hockey coaches, Category:Field hockey by country, Category:Field hockey competitions, Category:Field hockey players, Category:Field hockey venues, and Category:Women's field hockey. In addition, the "Summer Olympics" qualifier does not adequately disambiguate, as ice hockey was played at the 1920 Summer Olympics as well. Articles within the category will have to be moved too. BoojiBoy 13:31, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was withdrawn. Conscious 13:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
I bring this for general discussion. There are now hundreds of categories going right down to specific years back 2000 years. An example is:-
As an example, the University of Oxford is the only entry in Category:Educational institutions established in 1167, the categories for other years in the 1160s are redlinks and in categories for decades in the 12th century, five are redlinks. There is even Category:Educational institutions established in 2009 and for other years in the future.
I do not think this has ever been discussed and the present situation is crazy. What is even the point of categorising educational institutions by year of foundation. It is hardly a major thing in common for them. What to do? I have no idea, except perhaps delete individual year categories back to say 1600 and delete decade catgories as well before that. A lot of work for a bot. -- Bduke 00:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename per nom. Conscious 15:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Bizarrely named; so at the very least rename. However, it isn't clear that it adds encyclopedic value, so I would rather delete. For instance, it would be silly to use this category for a school for which at least the decade of establishment is known and categorized by; neither do all the articles grouped in this category have anything especially interesting or useful in common. TheGrappler 13:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was merge. Conscious 15:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Redundant to Category:Cuban people. TheGrappler 13:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename per initial nom. Conscious 15:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Was nominated for speedy rename to Category:Lists of fictional events, but seems redundant to numerous existing categories in Category:Fictional events. BD2412 T 16:05, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. Conscious 15:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete as vague and unnecessary. The text it contains should be in an article, not in a category. This article could then be categorized properly. Unfortunately, the list of proverbs only refers to wikiquote, in which no explanation is given about the meaning and origin of the proverb (which is very encyclopedic information imho). Errabee 10:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename all. Conscious 15:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Clarifying the names of a few categories. - EurekaLott 06:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename to Category:Golden Age superheroes. Conscious 15:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete as vague, unencyclopedic, and unnecessary. How superhero fiction was affected by and depicted World War II is an interesting and worthwhile topic for an article to tackle, but it makes for a poor category. This is a relationship to describe, not a clear and simple classification. This category instead conflates "Superheroes published during World War II," which may not mean that the characters' stories actually referred to or involved them in the conflict, with "Superheroes depicted as involved in World War II," which may not mean that the characters were actually published during that time (e.g., the The Invaders). Adding to the confusion are characters published during World War II who weren't actually published in war-related stories until decades after the end of the war. Then there are the characters whose war-related stories defined them, versus those who may have had no more than an issue or two in which they fought a Nazi. This does not make for a very useful category. Postdlf 05:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was delete (empty). Conscious 15:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Proper name of the band is KISS, I have already created KISS singles and moved all applicable articles. cholmes75 ( chit chat) 03:31, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was rename. Conscious 15:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
This category is about the family of the recent Prime Minister of Thailand, but it doesn't match most other non-royal family categories. Sumahoy 01:08, 30 May 2006 (UTC). reply
The result of the debate was delete. Conscious 15:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC) reply
This subcat of Category:Anti-heroes [2] was overlooked during the deletion of the metacategory. All the same reasons apply for it's deletion. CovenantD 00:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply