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 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.
Nominator's rationale: First off, this category was deleted before and I do not believe the reasons for deletion have changed. Therefore, I think this could rightly be deleted as re-creation of previously deleted content, but I decided to err on the side of caution and nominate this regularly because this was re-created back in 2012 and has apparently been overlooked since then. I don't think the original reasons for deletion has changed since its first nomination - this category violates WP:USERCAT in that it can not reasonably be expected to foster collaboration. There is already Category:WikiProject Skepticism members for users who wish to actually collaborate. Grouping users in a category who self-describe as skeptics serves no encyclopedic purpose as it is unrealistic to suggest that such users could be expected to share the same interests on a subject to collaborate on solely by being skeptics. VegaDark (talk) 19:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to being in this category I'm also a member of a fairly lively Facebook group with 50+ members that has exactly this unrealistic. It's been going for over 5 years now. 1Veertje (talk) 19:59, 24 November 2018 (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 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.
Delete. Since the vast majority of women married at some point in their lives, but except for First Ladies people aren't notable for being wives otherwise, this would be a non-defining and unmaintainable category for upwards of 90 per cent of all articles we have about female people at all. Bearcat (talk) 17:38, 25 November 2018 (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.
Delete. Since the vast majority of men married at some point in their lives, but people aren't notable for being husbands per se, this would be a non-defining and unmaintainable category for upwards of 90 per cent of all articles we have about male people at all. Bearcat (talk) 17:37, 25 November 2018 (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:speedy keep. In fact, since the only non-sock delete vote is an obvious templated comment not clearly meant for this discussion and only linking to the general informational page on policies, I'm closing this per WP:SNOW and WP:EVASION. If anyone who is not banned has a good reason to suggest deletion of this category, please start a new discussion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:07, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note - the nominator and at least one of the commenters here have been confirmed as sockpuppets. I have not speedy closed this discussion because there have been some other comments. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:58, 26 November 2018 (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.
Speedy delete per policy. –User456541 12:02, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Administrator note - the nominator and at least one of the commenters here have been confirmed as sockpuppets. I have not speedy closed this discussion because there have been some other comments. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:58, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
