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: Category only has only 2 entries. Mayors of cities this size (86 thousand) aren't automatically notable. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof?22:10, 6 September 2019 (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 Who Have Studied Law and Economics
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: Of the four categories in Category:Pyridoisoquinolines, the largest substructures common to all four compounds seem to be COc0cc1CCNC(CCC(C)CC)c1cc0OC, COc0cc1CCNC(CCCCC(C)C)c1cc0OC, and COc0cc1CCN2CC(CC)CCC2c1cc0OC, all of which have a substructure of tetrahydroisoquinoline. According to PubChem, pyridoisoquinoline appears to be pyridine fused to isoquinoline in a certain manner, resulting in a fully aromatic group of three rings with two nitrogen atoms, neither of which are in the center ring. By contrast, the tricyclic substructure common to the four members of Category:Pyridoisoquinolines, c0cc1CCN2CCCCC2c1cc0, has only one aromatic ring, has only one nitrogen atom, and has a nitrogen atom on the border of the first and second rings. None of the four compounds have a substructure of pyridoisoquinoline. I conducted a PubChem substructure search for pyridoisoquinoline and looked at the page for each of the ten results on the first page. The fact that none of those ten pages had a link to the English Wikipedia page for the compound (and furthermore did not even have a link to a Wikipedia page in another language or a link to a Wikidata page) suggests that Wikipedia doesn't have any pages about pyridoisoquinolines. In summary, all four members of Category:Pyridoisoquinolines are tetrahydroisoquinolines, none are pyridoisoquinolines, and Wikipedia does not appear to have any pages about pyridoisoquinolines, so the category should be deleted and its members moved to Category:Tetrahydroisoquinolines. Care to differ or discuss with me?The Nth User20:09, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I know nothing of the chemistry but it is standard to upmerge a category to its parents (which do not include the target, at present). Oculi (talk) 16:19, 6 September 2019 (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.
Wikipedians contributing under Dual License with CC BY-SA
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: For consistency with the parent categories and the article Creative Commons license, both of which suggest "CC BY-SA" is more appropriate than "CC-BySA". The IntEng categories are for those use the International English versions of the CC BY-SA 1.0 and CC BY-SA 2.0 licenses; however, my understanding is they are still the same licenses. (Category creator not notified because: bot) -- Black Falcon(talk)04:54, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless someone can produce a plausible explanation of how categories like this might possibly be useful to anyone. From looking at what-links-here I've not found any processes referring to these categories. Even if there was a process to (for example) check whether every surviving edit to an article was under a particular license it'd probably not use these categories (as they don't tell you when the user added the userbox to their page). This appears to be categorization just for the sake of categorization. DexDor(talk)11:54, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support for consistency. Agreed that the value of the category is unclear, but that is a question for the 1000+ users currently in the category rather than the small, uninvolved audience here. SFB12:14, 15 September 2019 (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.
Category:Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception
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 -- There is nothing here but the main article and an award (with a category for it which will probably be deleted - next item below). That is nowhere near the normal minimum of 5 items for a category. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2019 (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.