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. BencherliteTalk 08:15, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I have now renamed all the category entries that were there, and they are at this moment redlinks to the correct name. The nominated category is now empty. I would move the existing category myself, but I do not know what the correct protocol is. Choor monster (talk) 00:53, 4 March 2015 (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. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: With one article and no parents this category doesn't serve any navigational purpose. The reference to Twitter etc on the category page suggest that the creator doesn't understand wp categories. DexDor (talk) 23:20, 3 March 2015 (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The result of the discussion was:withdrawn. For musical artist categories, sometimes the eponymous parent category is applied by template in a pre-existing category, so it can take a period of time after category creation for those subcategories to appear in it.Good Ol’factory(talk) 22:37, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: With one article in this category and no parents it doesn't serve any navigational purpose. DexDor (talk) 23:17, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I added a few subcats and articles that seemed appropriate to the category. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't realised there are so many articles related to this person - CFD withdrawn. DexDor (talk) 20:43, 4 March 2015 (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. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Another silly "joke" category created without any parent categories - are these editors deliberately making work for editors who tidy up uncategorized categories ? DexDor (talk) 23:11, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Creator's comment: I created it for use on a Hunger Games userbox I made about the odds being with you. --Mr. Guye (talk) 23:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Having no parent categories shouldn't constitute deletion. --Mr. Guye (talk) 23:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or rename misleading and incorrectly named. This isn't about lucky Wikipedians, not lottery winners, or personal crises survivors, etc. Category:Hunger Games lucky Wikipedians might make sense to the current UBX, but not the current name. And why do we need a UBX with a misleading category, instead of Category:Wikipeidans who are fans of The Hunger Games or somesuch? Incidentally the UBX itself is misleading as it doesn't say it's about the Hunger Games either. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 06:09, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this category doesn't seem to collect WP members with a common encyclopedic specialism. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:17, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As named it has no value to the encyclopedia. If it relates to Hunger Games it still seems to not be the way to create a user category for such with encyclopedic value.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:58, 8 March 2015 (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 G4. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:44, 3 March 2015 (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. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – contents are dubious, too. Oculi (talk) 11:19, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this is one of multiple poorly named categories related to MC Primo. On Primo himself, I managed to get from a google translate version of an article from Brazil that he was a funk singer and he was shot to death in 2012 (not 2013 as the article had previously said). Beyond that the translation was too poor to really figure out, and I don't know enough Portuguese to read the materials directly. I can tell he is a really person, that the long listed name is his real name, that he is really dead. I was tempted to nominate the article for deletion, but I know too little of the Brazilian music scene to even begin to figure out if he passes notability. The article is in sub-standard English at present and really hard to read. I am not sure if the labeling of some of his songs as "notorious" is deliberate or shows poor grasp of English or a poor translation involved. What is clear is that the article needs work. However AfD is not the place to take poor articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:11, 8 March 2015 (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. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete horrible name, and already have categories for the way these were shot to death. The name is also ambiguous, as you can be shot with a sling like Goliath, or with a quarrel, etc -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 06:12, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Redundant, not well thought out at all. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:39, 6 March 2015 (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:Merge. Same content. We actually don't have articles about "Deaths by defenestration". We have biographies of "people executed by defenestration". damiens.rf 15:33, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Oculi. Defenestration is not always an execution. --Mr. Guye (talk) 21:58, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merge per above. Suggest create a subcat something like "People who commited suicide by defenestration" and move appropriate articles down into it. DexDor (talk) 23:04, 3 March 2015 (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. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:34, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Only one article (rest deleted) does not warrant a category JMHamo (talk) 12:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 08:00, 6 March 2015 (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:Deaths from plastic surgery complications[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:Delete. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:33, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom (and upmerge the "Death of ..." article). DexDor (talk) 22:58, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Also, the parent cat was never removed from articles after being deleted. JDDJS (talk) 00:53, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The cause of death is not defining to a person. One similar thing people cite is the year of death, this is defining since the time someone lives is very, very, very defining.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:13, 8 March 2015 (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:Users who Have Not won the Million Award but Would Like to someday[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:Delete. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:33, 10 March 2015 (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:Anesthesiology and palliative medicine journals[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: Most of the journals in this category are more in the field of pain management than palliative medicine (as many of their articles note), so retitling this category accordingly seems to be a good idea, to more accurately describe the journals therein. Everymorningtalk 02:27, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not really sure, but from our articles it appears that "palliative medicine" is a bit more inclusive than "pain management". If that is the case, I would leave things as they are, otherwise we might need to create another cat for those journals that are on palliative care specifically. At 25 members, I don't think that this cat is too large. --Randykitty (talk) 10:41, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. You won't "more accurately describe" the several journals that are about palliative care, & there doesn't seem much need to split. Johnbod (talk) 21:23, 3 March 2015 (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.
Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 March 11. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
