Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/User/Archive/February 2009 Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/User/Archive/February_2009

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 - jc37 02:32, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User Iran's PEACEFUL Nuclear Energy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Looks like some sort of individual user category, which have unanimous precedent to delete. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete/speedy delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – A grouping of users who "believe[... in] the equality of all nations in prosperity of nuclear energy" does not facilitate "coordination and collaboration between users for the improvement and development of the encyclopedia" (Wikipedia:Overcategorization/User categories). "User categories should not be used as 'bottom-of-the-page' notices," and it seems that this category was created simply to accompany the template. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. TheAE talk/sign 01:31, 16 March 2009 (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: Merge Category:Waray-Waray Wikipedians to Category:User war-N - jc37 02:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The single member was already in the target category. This category was populated by Template:User wikiwaray, which is about contributing to the Waray-Waray language Wikipedia. Cleaning up categories in that userbox. - jc37 02:22, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Waray-Waray Wikipedians (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Category description is "Users who are native speakers of the Waray-Waray language." - Improper naming convention for a babel category. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:User Waray-Waray as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Category:User war-N per BF's reasoning below. VegaDark (talk) 18:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Category:User war-N because "war" is the ISO 639-3 code for the language and the current Babel convention (which is admittedly less than ideal) is to use "User [ISO code]" for category names.–Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Didn't realize that category existed, which is obviously a better target. Nom changed to reflect the above. VegaDark (talk) 18:05, 8 March 2009 (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: rename to Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Vasile Goldiş West University of Arad--Aervanath (talk) 13:51, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who attend the Vasile Goldiş West University of Arad (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Improper naming convention of "who attend". Needs to be renamed to the standard convention of Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Vasile Goldiş West University of Arad. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename/speedy rename as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom for consistency with the standard convention. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:41, 1 March 2009 (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: Delete - jc37 02:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians against popularity contests (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Support/oppose category, which have an extensive precedent for deletion. See Wikipedia:User_categories_for_discussion/Archive/Topical_index#Wikipedians_who_support.2Foppose. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, as a support/oppose category that does nothing to facilitate encyclopedic collaboration between users. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Everyone voting delete are popular and wont to suppress the unpopular!, no but seriously. Delete per above. ch¹⁰ · 13:55, 7 March 2009 (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: Delete - jc37 02:13, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Users that play the Cruce card game (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Improper naming convention of "users", also knowing who plays a particular card game does not benefit the encyclopedia to categorize. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and precedent. Simply playing a card game does not automatically imply an interest in collaborating on articles about the game; in addition, this particular game does not even have its own article, which further limits the category's collaborative potential. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:00, 1 March 2009 (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: rename to Category:Wikipedians from New Zealand--Aervanath (talk) 13:49, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Users from New Zealand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Improper naming convention of "users". Category should be renamed to Category:Wikipedians from New Zealand, or deleted as knowing where someone is from is not particularly encylopedically beneficial (most location categories are "Wikipedians in" categories, which IMO should be the standard convention). VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename or delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename to this per nom. Versus22 _talk 00:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Category:Wikipedians in New Zealand or delete per VegaDark. While merging "from" and "in" may create miscategorization in some cases, I think it's OK in the case of the single user currently in this category. More generally, we may need to have (another) discussion about "in/from/of" naming conventions eventually, but I think that a merge would work for this particular case. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename to Category:Wikipedians from New Zealand, per nom. Though I strongly agree with Black Falcon that we should revisit the in/from/of discussion, until then, we should probably try to follow this category's seeming "intent". - jc37 02:12, 16 March 2009 (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: Delete, and notifying User:Cooljuno411. - jc37 02:00, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User:Cooljuno411/life archive (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Apparently some sort of individual user category, which have unanimous precedent to delete. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete/speedy delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and notify the user of the Special:Prefixindex function (I'll do it if he doesn't comment in this discussion). –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:41, 1 March 2009 (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: delete--Aervanath (talk) 13:31, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians in the Zips (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Apparently "the Zips" refers to Szepes County. Category needs to be renamed accordingly to match article name per standard naming conventions. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:Wikipedians in Szepes County as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changed to delete per BF's reasoning below. VegaDark (talk) 18:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Apathetic. I created it per User:Tusbra's request on my talk page. Tusbra had already created the code for the userbox and included that category. I just created it to fill it in. --Rkitko ^(talk) 05:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Szepes County ceased to exist in 1920, so I think that it would be misleading to classify users as being "in Szepes County". Spiš is the successor region, but it is an unoffical region only that falls within the boundaries of two countries: Poland and Slovakia, where it is further divided between two kraje.
  In light of this ambiguity, as well as the fact that the userbox which populates the category is a place of origin user template rather than a residence user template, I think we should simply remove the category from the template and forgo renaming or merging. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good points, changed to delete. VegaDark (talk) 18:05, 8 March 2009 (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: Delete - jc37 01:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Users who love getting friendly notices (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

"Who love" is an unexcyclopedic naming convention. Categorizing this also has no real encyclopedic benefit. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, as overcategorization on the basis of a characteristic that is overly inclusive ("grouping of users on the basis of something that may be a characteristic of most or all Wikipedia users") and a trivial shared preference ("grouping of users on the basis of shared preferences that are irrelevant to encyclopedia-building"). –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:18, 1 March 2009 (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: Delete - jc37 01:48, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who watch The Money Channel (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This new category is not useful for encyclopedic collaboration. Watching a particular TV channel does not imply any special ability, knowledge, or interest. --Stepheng3 (talk) 19:40, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and precedent against "Wikipedians by media station" categories. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:21, 1 March 2009 (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: delete--Aervanath (talk) 13:21, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WikiProject League of Copyeditors participants (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Category:WikiProject League of Copyeditors (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Defunct wiki-project, has been tagged as such for many months, should be deleted. MBisanz ^talk 20:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps they should be redirected to categories referring to Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. Have they been informed? --Bduke (Discussion) 21:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, defunct project. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (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: keep--Aervanath (talk) 13:08, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who listen to video game music (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Far too broad to foster any sort of collaboration. "Video game music", according to our article, is "any of the musical pieces or soundtracks found in video games." With the vast array of video games, this list of video game music would likely span almost every musical genre and would encompass millions of different tracks. Furthermore, we could just as easily rename this category to "Wikipedians who have ever played a video game not on mute, or are not deaf", because virtually everyone who has ever played a video game has listened to video game music. Overall, not a useful category to seek out others for collaboration. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, but possibly rename. This category is linked to a userbox which states "This user enjoys computer and video game music outside gaming", which addresses at least your second concern. As for your first concern, while the category of "video game music" is indeed broad (and I do understand your concerns about it), some varieties of it (especially older games) have a distinctive sound that can't really be described as anything other than "video game"-type music. (Also, while I can't speak for all people in this category, I suspect that at least some of the users here who listen to one variety of "video game music" will listen to a lot of others as well.) See below. —MarsJenkar (talk | contribs) 21:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename as above; I think it is definitely too broad as it is. Renaming is necessary. – Alex43223 ^{T | C | E} 06:50, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - What do you propose it be renamed to? VegaDark (talk) 10:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to - Category:Wikipedians who listen to video game music outside gaming, possibly? That would be the obvious answer, though I'll gladly accept a better name. —MarsJenkar (talk | contribs) 15:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think I just got a better idea. Rename to Category:Wikipedians interested in video game music. —MarsJenkar (talk | contribs) 15:25, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • That seems like a reasonable solution. VegaDark (talk) 02:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Broad, but legitimate. Scapler (talk) 20:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Scapler. I play the Oddworld games and some wrestling games. Also, it is quite unique so this is legitimate in my opinion. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^{T C} 20:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
• Delete and start over - Oppose renaming because any rename (such as to "interested in") would likely be a case of miscategorising Wikipedians, for the very reasons of the nom. A big problem of this category is that technology has advanced over time. Consider the "video game music" of today, which may be anything, and often includes direct musical tracks not unlike what one might purchase in a music store (of any genre), as opposed to the "video game music" of the pre-mid-90s, which "might" be considered a discernable genre of its own. Perhaps a solution could be to create Category:Wikipedians interested in classic video game music, or some such? - jc37 09:01, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 07:20, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Seems like a valid category. I'm sure most will know what it is about. The repetitious music you hear in games, which is designed so you never get tired of it. Dream Focus 10:53, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Legitimate and a simple name for a category for video game music. Versus22 _talk 10:43, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - categorising people by the kind of music they listen to is not helpful for collaboration. (And this category is particularly useless, as it is so vague.) Robofish (talk) 13:18, 27 February 2009 (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: rename to Category:Wikipedians in Kozhikode--Aervanath (talk) 13:04, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Calicut Wikipedians (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Calicut redirects to Kozhikode, which is a city. Needs a rename to conform with "Wikipedians by location" categories. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:Wikipedians in Kozhikode as nom. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 07:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Support rename as proposed by VegaDark. --Stepheng3 (talk) 19:41, 27 February 2009 (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: merge to Category:Calvinist Wikipedians--Aervanath (talk) 13:03, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Calvinist and Reformed Wikipedians (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems to be a duplicate of Category:Calvinist Wikipedians. Needs a merge one way or the other if so. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge as nom. VegaDark (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 07:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge duplicate category. Icewedge (talk) 00:34, 21 February 2009 (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: rename to Category:Wikipedians by interest in the history of a country--Aervanath (talk) 12:57, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians interested in the history of countries (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Should be renamed to better clarify this is a parent category. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:Wikipedians by interest in the history of a country as nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• I would actually prefer merging or deletion of all of those categories as, logically, the history of countries encompasses the history of nearly everything, and categories such as Category:Wikipedians interested in American history are redundant to Category:Wikipedians interested in the United States, but a rename per nom is fine. Icewedge (talk) 15:30, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree with Icewedge. Category:Wikipedians interested in the United States could include current events, economic power, diplomatic relations, space exploration, geology, etc. ad infinitum. I think that Category:Wikipedians interested in American history should be a subcategory of the former. Category:Wikipedians by interest in the history of a country could be a subcat of Users interested in Foo country and Users interested in history. !vote to Rename category as VegasWikian proposed. —Goodtimber (walk/talk) 02:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I assume you meant as I proposed, not VegasWikian? (our names are easily confusable). VegaDark (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename to "something". We should look at Category:History by country as the model, I think, though. As an alternative to the nom, perhaps: Category:Wikipedians by interest in a country's history? And there's always: Category:Wikipedians by interest in history by country, but that seems "odd" to me. - jc37 09:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:43, 20 February 2009 (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 rename. While I normally wouldn't close a nomination that I had initiated, this is an uncontroversial speedy nomination that has been unopposed for more than 10 days. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:28, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User-specific Welcome templates to Category:User-specific welcome templates

Nominator's rationale: To fix capitalization. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 20:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy rename per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2009 (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: delete. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Theodore Roosevelt High School (Kent, Ohio) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

High school alma mater category, which have an extensive history of deletion. VegaDark (talk) 00:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete/speedy delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:43, 4 February 2009 (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: delete. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User lzh-0 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

0-level category, which have been unanimously deleted per Wikipedia:User_categories_for_discussion/Archive/Topical_index#Wikipedians_by_0-level_language_knowledge. VegaDark (talk) 00:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete/speedy delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 00:43, 4 February 2009 (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: delete. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:EJXG supporters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Described as a list of Élton José Xavier Gomes supporters, it currently contains one user page. Gomes is a football (soccer) player. A user category based on support for a sports personality seems excessively narrow and unlikely to promote collaboration. --Stepheng3 (talk) 22:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as a "Wikipedians by individual" category, which have all been deleted. Additionally uses improper naming conventions as having no indication it is a Wikipedian category. VegaDark (talk) 00:43, 4 February 2009 (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.