Category:Fictional women soldiers and warriors[edit]
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: It is vague what counts as a "solider" or a "warrior". A more specific category such as "fictional women in military" might be useful JDDJS (talk) 23:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment military and warrior are not synonymous. Would Xena be in the military? -- 70.24.247.242 (talk) 04:08, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
keep Nothing vague about it at all. Nom. also confuses warriors and a military. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Soldiers are part of the military. If it is not vague, than please tell me what exactly qualifies as a warrior. JDDJS (talk) 15:14, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Nothing vague about it. Warrior is perhaps slightly wider than soldier. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:20, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and it's "soldier" not "solider". Warriors are not in military. --Niemti (talk) 18:03, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question are there soldiers who do not qualify as warriors?John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:48, 14 August 2012 (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.
Nominator's rationale:WP:SMALLCAT. Neal McCoy (who owned the label) and Darryl Worley were the only artists to chart any singles on the label — and even then, only one single from each artist is significant enough to have an article. 903 Music doesn't even have an article (it redirects to Neal McCoy). There is no potential for expansion since the label is defunct, and none of its other releases have potential as articles. (For reference, the label charted a total of five singles — two from Neal and three from Darryl.) Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:52, 8 August 2012 (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.
Nominator's rationale:WP:SMALLCAT. Label was only around for a couple years — Tracy Lawrence (who also owned it) was the only person to release any singles for it. And even then, he released only three singles. Of those three, Find Out Who Your Friends Are is the only one with the potential for an article. No other artist released any singles on the label, and it no longer exists. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:49, 8 August 2012 (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:No rename. Timrollpickering (talk) 08:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:Rename - while the parent category wll usually use the full name, I think e should shorten the names of the subcats. עוד מישהוOd Mishehu 20:08, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Bushranger. Cbbkr (talk) 21:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Especially the name of the stub tag, which should follow the format of others in Category:Star Trek stubs. Fortdj33 (talk) 02:54, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. As far as I'm aware, the show always had the "Star Trek" tag. Was it ever officially marketed as just "Deep Space Nine"? Wikipedia should use the official name, not an abbreviated name used only amongst some fans. Dawynn (talk) 02:56, 11 September 2012 (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.
Nominator's rationale: Green Party of the United States is the official name of the party and the page was recently moved to reflect that. The category and sub-categories should be renamed as well for symmetry with the parent page, as appears to be standard on Wikipedia.--JayJasper (talk) 19:52, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: These are likely eligible for speedy renaming per criterion C2D. - The BushrangerOne ping only 20:59, 8 August 2012 (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.
Rationalle: Undersized - scan finds only 40 articles for this stub category - while 60 is the standard minimum. עוד מישהוOd Mishehu 11:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: If the number of stubs is reduced below ten, then you should consider moving them to US Rapid Transit stubs and deleting it. ----DanTD
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 per C2D and previous CfD. The BushrangerOne ping only 23:08, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale:Rename. "House of" is scarcely or never used to denote these families, and as per past CFD. Zoupan 08:28, 8 August 2012 (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:Orange Line (Los Angeles County Metro Liner)[edit]
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 C2D. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:07, 10 August 2012 (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. Timrollpickering (talk) 09:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: One-article category, no other appropriate articles for inclusion, and the one article in it is miscategorised there. The BushrangerOne ping only 05:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question -- Are there any? The present category leads to a general article Urban Enterprise Zone on the concept in a number of countries. Populate if possible; otherwise, delete, without prejudice to re-creation, if it can be populated. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I checked, as far as I can tell, there are no articles on individual enterprise zones in Florida. - The BushrangerOne ping only 00:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now. If someone creates an article or two they can put them in Category:American Enterprise Zones. If we get a few articles we can consider creating the category, but it is not needed at this time.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:51, 14 August 2012 (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.
