Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/User/Archive/January 2009 Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/User/Archive/January_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 09:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User kv-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) 01:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete/speedy delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per VegaDark, level-0 categories are useless. Icewedge (talk) 21:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Everyone is presumptively level-0 at everything for which they do not specify otherwise. The alternative is everyone having a few hundred categories explaining all the languages they don't speak. bd2412 T 09:03, 27 January 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) 06:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User singer-songwriters (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Improper naming convention, at minimum needs a rename to use "Wikipedian" instead of user, and to conform with the current naming convention of Category: Wikipedians by profession. Also wouldn't oppose deletion as I don't particularly think categorizing by profession is a good idea (WP:NOR issues come up in the discussion around the logic of keeping such categories). VegaDark (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:Wikipedian singer-songwriters or delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - simply a category intersection. - jc37 09:21, 27 January 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 09:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who want to be cremated (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Not helpful to categorize desires per much precedent at Wikipedia:User_categories_for_discussion/Archive/Topical_index#Wikipedians_by_desire. VegaDark (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 01:22, 21 January 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. Wizardman 06:22, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ethnicity combination category, all have which been either deleted or double upmerged per Wikipedia:User_categories_for_discussion/Archive/Topical_index#Wikipedians_by_ethnicity_and_nationality. VegaDark (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or double upmerge (to Category:American Wikipedians and Category:Lebanese Wikipedians) as nom. VegaDark (talk) 01:22, 21 January 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: Đэλш†£ - jc37 09:28, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Such categories have been deemed not appropriate for Wikipedia per unanimous precedent at Wikipedia:User_categories_for_discussion/Archive/Topical_index#Wikipedians_by_medical_condition. Likely joke category, anyway. VegaDark (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as nom. VegaDark (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete    per    ^nom. –Pomte 03:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Straitjacket and confine in a padded room. —MarsJenkar (talk | contribs) 18:35, 26 January 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. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposing deletion of Category:Wikipedians who use a MacBook Air.

Nominator's rationale: This category does not assist in the construction of the encyclopedia and has little potential for promoting collaboration. - Stepheng3 (talk) 21:14, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Wikipedia:User_categories_for_discussion/Archive/Topical_index#Wikipedians_by_computer_hardware. VegaDark (talk) 02:45, 13 January 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 delete as substantially similar re-creation of previously deleted content (see Wikipedia:User categories for discussion/Archive/August 2007#Category:Wikipedians by year of birth). VegaDark (talk) 21:04, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of Category:1980 user births.

Nominator's rationale: This category does not assist in the construction of the encyclopedia. It presents little or no opportunity for promoting collaboration. - Stepheng3 (talk) 08:09, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Totally unnecessary, as there's a template for ages of users. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^{T C} 20:21, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

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 delete as substantially similar to previously deleted content {see Wikipedia:User categories for discussion/Archive/June 2007#Category:Wikipedians with iPhones. VegaDark (talk) 02:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of Category:Wikipedians who use the iPhone.

Nominator's rationale: This category does not assist in the construction of the encyclopedia. It presents little or no opportunity for promoting collaboration. - Stepheng3 (talk) 01:21, 7 January 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. Icewedge (talk) 08:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of Category:Silly Wikipedians.

Nominator's rationale: This is a pointless category which simply fills up cruft. Wikipedia is not a social networking site; such a "category" serves no purpose. Categories which are "jokes/nonsense" are explicitly prohibited by WP:Overcategorization/User categories. Tb (talk) 08:34, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Useless category, not the type of category we have or should have on Wikipedia. VegaDark (talk) 10:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Per WP:Overcategorization/User categories#Inappropriate types of user categories: "Categories that are jokes/nonsense. This includes... [categories] created primarily for humourous or satirical purposes". Scapler (talk) 20:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above, plus the category has only one user at the moment. —MarsJenkar (talk | contribs) 15:38, 6 January 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) 12:53, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming Category:WikiProject Prison Break participants to Category:Prison Break Task Force participants

Nominator's rationale: per the taskforcification of the wikiproject NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 00:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from 2008 December 23 CfD. Thanks, — Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Category:WikiProject Television/Prison Break task force participants to match the naming convention of current task force categories. This needs the first part to indicate it is a Wikipedian category, also "task force" shouldn't be capitialized. VegaDark (talk) 10:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• See also the outcome here for a related category. The result was similar to the proposal by VegaDark except "Television" wasn't included there. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:13, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Close. This is a Project, not a task force. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^{T C} 20:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Huh? It was a project, but has now become a task force of WikiProject Television. VegaDark (talk) 02:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename to "<topic> task force participants" (thus without the WikiProject delimeter and slash). A task force can actually potentially fall under more than one WikiProject. While this may not be the case in this instance, let's not start a precedent that might cause a need for undoing later. - jc37 09:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • But does that adequately convey that this is a user category? "Wikiproject" at the start would normally be an indicator of this, without that it is less clear. VegaDark (talk) 00:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Question: Do any of the other Wikiproject TV task forces have participant categories, and what are they named? I only found one, and it was still named Wikiproject foo participants (no mention of wikiproject TV). I guess I'm wondering if this is needed (especially since the member list is already at Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Prison Break --Kbdank71 21:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  Valid question (and point). Technically, anyone who is a participant in a task force/work group, is a participant of one or more WikiProjects which are "parents" to that task force/work group. And task forces/work groups are supposed to be about something more focused or specific than the general Wikiproject. Based on that I think we should probably put a quick halt on all task force/work group category memberships. Duplicative, and has a great potential to "bloat" significantly. - jc37 09:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  Good points, no objection to that either. VegaDark (talk) 18:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  To clarify: Delete per my above comments. - jc37 02:36, 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.