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 The actual contents do not match the category title.
Dimadick (
talk) 04:11, 1 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Support Better solution indeed. --
Just N. (
talk) 00:37, 6 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Support the target better describes the actual contents.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 17:22, 26 January 2022 (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:Horticulturists and gardeners
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.
Rename but merge page history. –
FayenaticLondon 07:38, 31 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Rename The change in scope seems reasonable to me.
Dimadick (
talk) 04:12, 1 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename Seems a better solution. --
Just N. (
talk) 00:38, 6 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Support' per nom --
Lenticel(
talk) 12:09, 6 January 2022 (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:Naturalised citizens of the Republic of China
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: Consistent with the country article, which is named
Taiwan (while
Republic of China is a redirect to it).--
MonFrontieres (
talk) 19:57, 30 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Support -- WP decided some years ago that the post-1945 polity should be called "Taiwan".
Peterkingiron (
talk) 14:39, 1 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 00:40, 6 January 2022 (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:Golf drivers
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:Renamed according to the nominator's proposal.
(non-admin closure) (
t ·
c) buidhe 09:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Such people are never referred to as "golf drivers". Propose renaming this and its sub-categories to "Long drive golfers" for clarity and accuracy. wjematherplease leave a message... 18:45, 30 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. "Golf drivers" is just confusing. A driver is normally a club not a person.
Nigej (
talk) 08:30, 31 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Rename not about golf clubs (batons) --
65.92.246.142 (
talk) 03:27, 4 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Rename per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 00:41, 6 January 2022 (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 associated with The Greenbrier
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. It seems to have been purged already, as the 14 biographies currently in the category all state a strong connection with The Greenbrier. –
FayenaticLondon 16:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment. I created this category in an effort to better organize the contents of the overall category for The Greenbrier, as it mainly contained sporting events and personnel associated with The Greenbrier (including past executives, chefs, and golf pros). My intent was to separate out the people associated with The Greenbrier, and seek further consensus on whether to make an additional category for the resort’s sporting events. I am not opposed to deleting this category, and will support the resulting decision by my fellow editors. –
West Virginian (talk) 00:27, 31 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Clearly not defining. We can't have a category for every person connected with every golf course.
Nigej (
talk) 08:35, 31 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Purge and repurpose --
Category:The Greenbrier people would be acceptable, limited to "past executives, chefs, and golf pros" etc employed there, but excluding those who merely play there or turn up to take part in or run tournaments.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 14:43, 1 January 2022 (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:1880s LGBT-related mass media
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. In this case no merging is required, as the sub-cat is already within the other parent hierarchies. –
FayenaticLondon 11:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Empty container category, no possibility for expansion. The first LGBT oriented periodical was in 1898. (
t ·
c) buidhe 17:03, 30 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose This would leave the literature subcategory out of proper category tree.
Dimadick (
talk) 04:15, 1 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 00:44, 6 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. --
Lenticel(
talk) 12:10, 6 January 2022 (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:1870s LGBT-related mass media
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. –
FayenaticLondon 11:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Empty container category, no possibility for expansion. The first LGBT oriented periodical was in 1898. (
t ·
c) buidhe 17:03, 30 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Oppose This would leave the literature subcategory out of proper category tree.
Dimadick (
talk) 04:16, 1 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. --
Just N. (
talk) 00:45, 6 January 2022 (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:Real closed field
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:no consensus. –
FayenaticLondon 07:48, 20 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale: Is a set category, not a topic category. –
LaundryPizza03 (
dc̄) 10:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep - the articles are not all closed fields; eg a ring is not a field. That is, it is a topic category.
Oculi (
talk) 12:22, 30 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Support -- categories are normally plural. No strong view on the merits of existence, but the main article lists examples of real closed fields.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 14:49, 1 January 2022 (UTC)reply
To clarify my earlier vote, e.g. a
superreal numberis an example of a real closed field indeed, but in reverse "real closed field" is not a defining property of superreal numbers. So keeping the list in the article is perfectly fine.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 07:32, 7 January 2022 (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.