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:relisted on 17th.
Kbdank71 13:55, 17 October 2008 (UTC)reply
I support deletion of the category. There are three (sub)categories here that seem indistinguishable to me: Defunct hotels of the United States, and two of its subcategories, Destroyed hotels in the United States, and Demolished hotels in the United States. What is the difference between "destroyed" and "demolished"? By all means these two subcategories should be merged. Furthermore, I suggest taking things a step further: What is the distinction between "defunct" versus "destroyed/demolished", and is it an important distinction? I realize an old hotel might be converted into another use, as opposed to being "destroyed/demolished", but nonetheless there seems to be too much rhetorical hair-splitting in the naming of these categories.
Canadian2006 (
talk) 21:50, 14 October 2008 (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:Matsushita
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.
Kbdank71 13:37, 17 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Rename. Apparently the company was renamed.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 19:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Rename per official announcement by Panasonic shown
here ++
Arx Fortis (
talk) 02:59, 12 October 2008 (UTC)reply
rename for the excellent reasons listed
Hmains (
talk) 16:24, 13 October 2008 (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:Limited Brands
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.
Nominator's rationale:Rename. Brand categories follow the convention of
Category:company name brands. Since this is the category for brands, the category name should reflect this. I realize that the name does appear somewhat confusing, but it does match the form used for most of the other brand categories.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 07:31, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom.
Johnbod (
talk) 12:57, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment I added a second additional categories to this nomination.
Vegaswikian (
talk) 18:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom.
Occuli (
talk) 18:36, 11 October 2008 (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:Indian people in history
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.
Nominator's rationale:Delete. All people are "in history". Category is essentially redundant to
Category:Indian people and its many subcategories. Creator may have meant "Indian people who lived a long time ago", judging by the (few) contents of the category. Notified creator with {{
subst:cfd-notify}}Good Ol’factory(talk) 07:29, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Not the way to do it.
Johnbod (
talk) 12:37, 11 October 2008 (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:Military Schools
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.
Kbdank71 13:49, 17 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Rename. The current name is rather misleading. It is a sub category of
Category:Military education and training in India. The category also begins with the following short description of the category: The military schools in India were started in 1925 with establishment of Chail Military School (King George Royal Indian Military College) and later on Ajmer, Bangalore, Belgaum and Dholpur were started by Govt. of India.Dbiel(
Talk) 05:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
I failed to notice that this category was just created today. So now I am not sure if the category should be renamed or deleted. Just raising the question
Dbiel(
Talk) 05:31, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
No, except I think for
Chail Military School which takes boys 10-18 & should be moved to this cat, the academies are all for adults, whereas the schools are all for boys. Rename per nom. But there is a problem with the whole category tree - following US vocabulary,
Category:United States military academies joins both of these, whereas the other national categories mostly just have the institutions for serving military, like the US
Naval War College. Globally, a military academy is understood as one of the latter. We should not enforce merging institutions for 10 year old boys with those for 30 yr-old captains, and should be working towards national cats that distinguish these types, though joined at some level, like
Category:Military education and training in the United States. Both these are in
Category:Military education and training in India, so that's fine. (
talk) 12:40, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom, but should it not be 'schools' (lowercase)?
Occuli (
talk) 12:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment I agree that the new name should be
Category:Military schools in India, lower case, that was my error in the original posting. If it is proper to change it in the middle of the discussion, feel free to do so, I am not experienced enought to know if that change is proper at this point in the discussion, but it does need to be done. Thanks for catching my error.
Dbiel(
Talk) 16:31, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
I have updated the tag on the category page to reflect the correct new proposed name.
Dbiel(
Talk) 17:12, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
I've changed it above as well.
Occuli (
talk) 23:44, 11 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. __
meco (
talk) 20:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)reply
SupportOtto4711. A problem perhaps arises due to Partition. I ma not sure what the conveniuonal way of dealing with that is.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 23:00, 13 October 2008 (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.