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.
Selectively oppose -- it is the "z"-spelt parent that is misspelt. Nigeria is a Commonwealth country and will use British orthography. Slovenia and Sweden are in EU, where English is an official language, again British English. Furthermore organisation is itself a Swedish word. I do not oppose Japan and am neutral as to the others. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:57, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly support As I have said in other edits, it would probably be best if the spelling was standardized to the most widely accepted variant. If done, this would lower the probability that new articles would be in conflict with the spelling used by the parent article, and as 'organizations' is the most common for the demographics of Wikpedia editors, it should be used to prevent excessive work later.SuperChris (talk) 18:31, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If SuperChris means that there should just be one spelling thoughout the categorisation system I would strongly support that. There is no good reason for using two different spellings. I don't care which we use. Rathfelder (talk) 21:07, 28 October 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.
Support I created this category a while back. Maybe there used to be additional items in the category? I don't know what I had in mind at that time, but a category with one page doesn't make sense. Forbes72 (talk) 19:53, 28 October 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.
Category:Lists of American crime drama television series episodes
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.
It's an important distinction. In addition to comedy, there are also criminal documentary/reality series, which List of Cops episodes fits into. Cat: Lists of American crime television series should contain the non-dramas, and the drama subcat - which the rest should be moved to. There aren't enough entries to justify subcats for comedies & doc/reality. Jim Michael (talk) 13:14, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is a valid distinction here, namely the difference between crime drama (too many police procedurals to count) and crime comedy (Brooklyn Nine-Nine, Batman, etc.) and crime reality (Cops, America's Most Wanted). If there are articles in the wrong category they can be moved, so the fact that the distinction in content hasn't been fully sorted yet isn't a deletion rationale in and of itself. Bearcat (talk) 16:21, 24 October 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.
Oppose While it is true that video games aren't traditionally categorized by orientation, this is an important aspect of the way that the game is experienced, and games that are vertically oriented aren't necessarily vertically scrolling. There's no reason to get rid of this either.SuperChris (talk) 18:27, 27 October 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.
Meanwhile Category:People by association largely serves as a container category of container categories, implying that very few articles are directly in an association category. This is one of the remaining exceptions. In this case, grouping by having "associated with" in the article title is actually a case of WP:SHAREDNAME. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly Oppose There's no reason to delete this category. It serves as an important subcategory allowing for discovery of individuals based on the organization they are in. SuperChris (talk) 18:24, 27 October 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.