| Revision as of 19:35, 4 June 2007 editJc37 (talk | contribs)Administrators48,969 edits reopened discussion, and moved comment← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 02:23, 3 February 2022 edit undoEthanGaming7640 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users17,055 edits Modifying redirect categories using Capricorn ♑ | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| {{cfdu-header}} | |||
| {{Redirect category shell| | |||
| ==Speedy nominations== | |||
| {{R from merge}} | |||
| <div width="90%" class="boilerplate metadata" id="speedy" style="text-align: left; background: skyblue; padding:0px; border: 1px solid #333366; margin-top:2px; margin-bottom:2px;"> | |||
| {{R to project namespace}} | |||
| *If you have a legitimate candidate for speedy rename/merge/delete, place them here instead of under the date. | |||
| {{R from subpage}} | |||
| *If something listed here is not a clear case for speedy, please re-list under the current date.</div> | |||
| }} | |||
| ==New nominations by date== | |||
| <div width="90%" class="boilerplate metadata" id="speedy" style="text-align: left; background: skyblue; padding:0px; border: 1px solid #333366; margin-top:2px; margin-bottom:2px;"> | |||
| *Please list new nominations at the top of the list for today's date.</div> | |||
| ===June 4=== | |||
| ==== Speedied deletions ==== | |||
| :The following categories were recently speedily deleted by ]. Several of these survived recent UCFD discussions, and several editors posted concerns on Shanel's talk page about the deletions. As such, I'm listing them for "normal" UCFD discussion. I'm choosing to not pick amongst them, but to list them all individually for discussion. Note: Shanel has also depopulated several of them either partially or fully, by a userbox change, or direct user page editing. So the amount of editors in a category shouldn't be a factor in the discussions. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Mass procedural nominations are not a productive use of time, or a fair discussion. If you don't want something deleted, don't nominate it for deletion. These are all nominations with no ''argument'' for deletion at all, as they are being listed procedurally by a neutral party. They are unfairly predisposed to be kept already, with that process. Rather, if you disagree with a deletion, take it to '']'', where disputed deletions go, and ''explain your reasoning''. And if you are only neutral with respect to the deletion, and don't actually want something undeleted, don't waste our time with a nomination. ]·] 17:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Free-spelling Wikipedians ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' - Free spelling on Misplaced Pages is a preference for users to spell all words, except for proper nouns, however they see fit. At the moment a totally unworkable preference and one not practiced. But the preference remains and as Misplaced Pages content is composed of words, I think a relevant category. - ] 08:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Wikipedians who consider themselves "jack of all trades" ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - I consider myself as belonging to this category, but choose not to list myself there as a more precise explanation of an editor's style on their user page is more helpful. Jack of all trades is not a simple enough concept to be given justice by a category, and it seems could only do so with subcategories. - ] 09:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Furry Wikipedians ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' - already definitely kept on a November 2006 CfD. ] when it was speedily deleted without discussion (see also ] - I am not personally convinced by the arguments there). Does not meet the speedy deletion criteria, and correctly identifies users who may be involved in editing articles in ] and subcategories. I have reinstated it to ] - a full list of those that ''were'' in the category prior to its removal is . ] 16:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' - Furry fandom is a legitimate and wide topic to be interested in and to write articles about. To deal with one particular concern, ] instead of hiding users for protection. –] 17:25, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Geek Wikipedians ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Wikipedians who have been arrested ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Absurdist Wikipedians ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Dadaist Wikipedians ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Nerd Wikipedians ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Wikipedian barefooters ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Transformation Fetishist Wikipedians ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Pregnant Wikipedians ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:BBW Wikipedians ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Wikipedians with low bone density ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Wikipedians who fear clowns ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===== Category:Wikipedians with nits ===== | |||
| *] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - listing for discussion. - ] 08:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''speedy deleted''' by Ryulong. ] (]) 06:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| "Not" category. It does not help Misplaced Pages to know who does not like something. All similar categories have been deleted in the past, we have set enough precedent so stuff like this should be speedyable. ] (]) 06:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete/speedy delete''' as nom. ] (]) 06:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ===June 3=== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| Cat description is "Understand AIM talk but don't like it anyway? You're at home here". We don't need a category for people who "understand AIM talk but don't like it". This is useless and also a "not" category. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nom. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - "not"-category. This seems to be a userbox that didn't need a category. - ] 11:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *:Nope, apparently it's a category that should have been a userbox : ) - ] 11:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. Horrific user cat. I'm not even sure why they would even create such a category. ''''']]]''''' <small>]</small> 03:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| Useless babel categories. There will never be a Misplaced Pages written in ], and users will never have a legitimate reason to go looking for others in these categories. Hence, having categories for this is pointless. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete all''' as nom. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete all''' - I almost suggested Merging all to ], but after reading over ], this appears to just be a type of ], commonly used in concordance with ]. Shouldn't be a babel cat, and shouldn't use the babel naming convention. However, I wouldn't oppose the creation of a single category for usage/interest. - ] 11:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete all''' per nom. The Babel categories should be used for serious purposes. Regular userboxes are more than enough for expressing love of the leet "language". ] <small>(])</small> 05:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| Would set precedent for a category for every award/medal given out by every country's army, which we definitely don't need. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nom, or rename to something like ]. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *If delete, these categories should be depopulated: | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| :] | |||
| *These medals have one article each, which do not themselves list the notable recipients, and there are quite a lot more of them, so I think they are better '''merge'''d into ] or appropriately named new subcategories. | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was speedy deleted, only populated by deleted template. ] ] 15:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| One of the least useful user categories I have ever seen. And that's saying something. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nom. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Strong delete''' (How about ]? : ) - ] 11:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Delete''' - as empty, per creator's action. - ] 21:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Another useless category. We don't need to categorize users based on previous ownership of items. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nom. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - Former ownership as a basis for a Wikipedian category would seem to be a bad idea. Possibly rename to ]. Or perhaps create the latter category, and offer it to those removed from the former category. (For accuracy of inclusion.) - ] 11:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *:I created the new category, but it seems that the creator of the populating userbox already removed the category. - ] 21:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was speedy deleted, only populated by deleted template. ] ] 15:56, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| We already have ]. Categorizing "Operatives" is nonsense. Only user in the category is already in the latter, so no need to merge. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete/speedy delete''' as nom. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - though cute : ) - ] 11:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| Category name speaks for itself. No joke categories. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nom. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' to ] (or "...who love..." which is the other pet variant naming convention, and matches the category's introduction). - ] 11:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' Yeah, ok. <sup>†</sup> ''']]]''' 12:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' per ]. "Who love" is less exact than "who own" in this case. –] 04:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| Similar to the "Wikipedians interested in general knowledge" category, this is potentially speedyable. Potentially all-inclusive and not useful. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nom. ] (]) 09:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - It's a little different than being interested in general knowledge, but not much... - ] 11:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''', ''again'' — perhaps we need "Wikipedians who suffer déjà vu" :-) ] 08:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Speedy D''' - We have a list called '']''. -- ] - <small>]</small> 10:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''speedy rename''', uncontroversial. ] (]) 17:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] to ] per convention in ]. ] 12:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| === June 1 === | |||
| ==== Xbox ==== | |||
| *] to ] | |||
| *] to ] | |||
| Per such discussions as the one below.--] 14:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Oppose rename''' of Xbox Live, '''support rename''' of Xbox 360. Xbox live is an online service, and therefore there are not exactly "games" for the feature, as would be expected.--] 17:39, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' Xbox live category, '''rename''' 360 category. Don't need a category for those who play Xbox live, a category for that would only facilitate collaboration on 1 more article than its parent category, so it is unnecessary. Don't upmerge, since both regular Xbox and Xbox 360 use Xbox live and there isn't any way to know which applies to each user. ] (]) 23:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| <hr style="width:50%;"> | |||
| :'''<span style="color:Chocolate;">Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached</span>'''<br/><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, {{{1|] (]) 19:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)}}}</small><!-- from Template:Relist --> | |||
| *<s>'''Oppose rename''' of Xbox Live</s>, '''support rename''' of Xbox 360. - sounds good to me, per the reasons above. - ] 09:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC) - Oops, I meant to say '''Delete''' Xbox live. - ] 11:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **Me too.--] 11:10, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==== Nintendo ==== | |||
| *] to ] | |||
| *] to ] | |||
| *] to ] | |||
| *] to ] | |||
| Per such discussions as the one below.--] 14:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' No "Nintendo" Wii? That would seem to go along with the rest of them. ] (]) 23:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :*Unlike the other consoles, "Nintendo" does not appear to be part of the name "]". I think "play the Wii" is more correct than "play Wii", as in the article. –] 01:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::*Definitely not "Nintendo Wii.'''--] 14:10, 24 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| <hr style="width:50%;"> | |||
| :'''<span style="color:Chocolate;">Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached</span>'''<br/><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, {{{1|] (]) 19:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)}}}</small><!-- from Template:Relist --> | |||
| *I have an idea- Why don't we just go with the article name for all these game categories? ] (]) 19:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :*"Games" isn't really necessary. Some PS2 games are also Xbox games are also GameCube games. It's the console that's in the spotlight here. However, without "games" they'd need the article "the". Either way, go with the article name. –] 02:32, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::* Unless you're juggling the joysticks or something, you're not playing with the console. It's merely a means to an end, ie. playing games. It's just shorter to say "...who play <console> games", than to say "...who play games on the <console>". (and we also avoid the "on" vs "using" debate : ) - Oh, and support using the ], which, presumably, should be the same as the article. - ] 09:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *Going with the article names means following the nomination as is.--] 11:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==== Category:Wikipedians by number of edits ==== | |||
| ''(Relisted due to additional tagging 2 days into the discussion) - ] 19:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC)'' | |||
| *'''Delete''' ] | |||
| **'''Delete''' ] | |||
| **'''Merge''' ] to ] | |||
| **'''Merge''' ] to ] | |||
| **'''Merge''' ] to ] | |||
| **'''Merge''' ] to ] | |||
| **'''Merge''' ] to ] | |||
| **'''Merge''' ] to ] | |||
| **'''Merge''' ] to ] | |||
| **'''Merge''' ] to ] | |||
| **'''Merge''' ] to ] | |||
| Note: "...5,000 edits" has already been deleted as empty by ]. - ] 22:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :'''Note 2:''' Now all target categories listed, as well as ], ], ], and ] have been tagged with the proposition to delete all edit count categories being brought up. ] (]) 19:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Merge and Delete''' as listed above, as nominator. - ] 22:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete ], ], and all subcategories''' in each except for ]. These edit count categories are essentially useless, and have been without a DRV overturning the deletion since (so these are technically speedyable). If no consensus for this, merge as nominated (and delete all empty categories in ] as well as ], which is nearly all-inclusive. ] (]) 00:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Nuke from high orbit, burn at the stake, stomp and piss on the ashes,''' then delete. <span style="color:red;font-weight:bold">^</span>]<sup></span>]]</sup> <em style="font-size:10px;">00:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC)</em> | |||
| *'''Delete''' promotes a bad thing. ''']''' ('']'' | '']'') 00:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' I've been waiting a while for this nomination, but I didn't have the guts to do it myself. All Wikipedians are equal, even if some have more edits than others. :) ]] 20:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - Note: Since the target categories are not tagged, they won't be deleted as a result of this discussion. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *:I've tagged the remaining categories. ] (]) 03:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *::Ok, I've relisted, since it's gone beyond the first day of discussion. - ] 19:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete all'''. Perhaps some useful purpose can be offered for ranking Wikipedians on number of edits, but I don't see it. Cred and staus in the Misplaced Pages community shouldn't be a matter of raw number of edits. --] 09:14, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete all, as inappropriate, but calmly. ''']''' 22:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete all.''' Tough call for me, since lots of people seem to want these. But it's an abomination to use a neutral system to track users' supposed superiority over others. Leave the infoboxes for those who want to track their contributions, but no categories.--] 11:06, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *<s>'''Keep''' When it comes down to it these categories keep getting deleted and recreated over and over again and it is much more valuable to have them well-organized, uniform and easily located than to fool ourselves into thinking that editors don't keep track of the number of edits they make. I would also comment that putting a CFD notice on the categories '''will not''' lead to a concensus involving those in the categories, only those who patrol the deletion discussions hoping to "nuke" things that don't fit thier view of wikipedia as some kind of eutopia. I will be notifying those who requested this particular feature be added and I only hope that these are not deleted without the input of those in the categories. ] 04:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)</s> | |||
| *:''"I would also comment that putting a CFD notice on the categories '''will not''' lead to a concensus involving those in the categories..."'' - Well, as this is the process for all XfD (CfD/AfD/MfD/TfD/etc) discussions, you might want to find a relevant talk page or ] page to discuss that concern? - ] 06:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Merge/Delete''' Rereading the nomination it is proposed to consolidate categories, which is fine with me, the tags on some of these are wrong though. I would not support removing ], ] as they both work with {{tl|User contrib}} which is the source of this nomination in the first place ] 18:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Haven't been deleted?''' -- ] - <small>]</small> 10:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===May 31=== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| Nonsense babel category. "These users wish to speak Inuktitut". Essentially a 0-level category, since this is for people who don't speak the language at all. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nom. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' per nom. --] 18:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - Perhaps I am misreading it, but it would seem that this category is for those "who wish to speak", not for those "who wish they could speak". So it's ''not'' a 0-level category. It sounds more like it's their preference to speak it. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *:In that case, it is still useless (unless we want one of these for every language preference people have) and shouldn't be in the babel system at minimum. ] (]) 19:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *::I presume that ] is a valid babel language. This category probably just needs a rename to follow the babel naming conventions. - ] 09:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| "A category for people who feel that they don't have a completed userpage. Yet." - We don't need a category for this. Nobody is going to have a reason to go looking for userpages that are under construction. Looks like the category was created simply for the sake of being associated with the template. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nom. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - I've noticed these templates to be categorized for some time before this category was even made. The previous category for these templates was ], which even included these userpages, and so an alternative catergory was made in order to clean up the category a bit. Does this mean that the userpages should be moved back to the original category, or should we prevent these templates to be categorized in any way at all? ] 23:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - Userpages under construction have no need to be categorized, with the possible exception of drafts of articles (] contains some of these). So the template {{tl|User page construction}} should not categorize any userpages at all, because there's no navigational value in grouping together "incomplete" userpages - who'd want to look at them? –] 23:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - Noting this ], which seems to be similar in context. However, I don't ser this as a recreation, by any means. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' since techincally ''all Misplaced Pages'', including user pages, are currently "under construction" by definition of the wiki. If no connsensus to delete, consider a '''Merge''' to ]. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **'''Just Delete''', as I'm pretty sure that having an userpage under construction doesn't tell that would the user actually need any help, and the purpose of the template would also become very misleading. ] 21:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| "These users would like to be able to speak more languages", "This user would like to be able to speak many more languages", etc. etc. Knowing who wants to speak more languages is not useful to Misplaced Pages at all. The only possible useful one is the last one, stating "This user is a professional translator of one or more languages". It isn't all that helpful without knowing what languages they translate, however, and such a category shouldn't be in the babel system if deemed keepable. | |||
| *'''Delete all''' except possibly the last one, which would need a rename to something like ] as nom. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete all''' and '''merge''' ] to ] as they have the exact same scope. –] 23:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **Good idea. ] (]) 03:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Merge all''' to ], except ], which should instead be merged to ]. I think knowing that someone wants to learn how to speak more languages ''is'' useful, and at the very least shows interest in languages. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *:Does such a category belong in the babel system though? At least move it to ] or something (even though I still fail to see how such a category would be useful). ] (]) 03:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *::I totally agree with a rename. How about renaming to ]. (Due to potential for abuse/divisiveness, "wish" is probably not a good word to use in Wikipedian category names.) - ] 19:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| Don't need categories for this invented language. There will never be a Misplaced Pages written in ], nobody will ever have a use for going through such categories to find people. ] does not currently exist, but this should set precedent for that category as well. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete all''' as nom. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete all''' - per ], this is a ], and not a language at all. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Qryrgr nyy''' cre abz. –] 03:06, 1 Whar 2007 (HGP) | |||
| *'''Delete all'''. As noted, this is not a language, but a cipher. There are not, nor will there ever be (I hope), Misplaced Pages pages written in ROT13. Klingon or Quenya, perhaps. ROT13, no. Makes a fine userbox (in line with the ones about ], ], and ]), but not a category. --] 09:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===May 30=== | |||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| :'''Rename''' ] to ] - Following "Lists of..." naming convention. - ] 22:36, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' as nominator. - ] 22:36, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' per nom. –] 00:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' per nom. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| '''Delete''' as redundant to ], which is used to disambiguate against ]. –] 16:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' per nom. Looks redundant. ] (]) 07:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as ambiguous. ''''']]]''''' <small>]</small> 02:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete with reservation'''. Needlessly reduplicative redundancy is a bad thing, even to the point of not being good, and should be deleted and removed. I will, however, accept this category as a supercategory containing ] and ] -- then it would serve as a the category equivalent of a disambig page. Otherwise, it must go. --] 09:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' per nom. -- ] - <small>]</small> 10:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| Nonsense babel category level, only whole numbers please. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' or merge to 1-level cat as nominator. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' and the user can choose which subcat of ] they wish to be in. –] 00:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''', per ] and ]. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| Nonsense babel category level, only whole numbers please. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' or merge to 2 or 3-level cat as nominator. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - The template can categorize users into level 2, as that appears to be the closest level of proficiency. –] 00:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Merge''' to level 2. ''''']]]''''' <small>]</small> 02:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''', per ] and ]. - ] 03:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| No 6-level categories, please. Says the same exact thing for 5-level, and should be merged. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Merge''' to ] as nominator. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Merge''' - professorial is professional, unless I'm missing something. –] 00:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Merge''' - Except for different colors, means pretty much the same thing. -- ] ] 00:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' as author. The command of the English language exhibited by some of the so-called "professionals" sporting ] is sorely lacking. — ] <span class="plainlinksneverexpand">(]|])</span> 14:11, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **Misplaced Pages can't police user cats to determine who actually belongs in what category, and the solution isn't to continually make higher and higher babel level categories based on the personal opinion that people in the previous level don't qualify. You are also arguing that this be the only 6-level babel category allowed, what makes this so special? ] (]) 19:04, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' I write articles off-Wiki for teaching purposes on the nuts and bolts of English (TEFL). There'll be plenty of others around here who can make similar claims. ] 15:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **This doesn't explain how the 5-level category wouldn't suffice. ] (]) 19:04, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ***The groups don't compare the same things. En-4 is about familiarity/comfort. En-5 is about social context. En-6 is about depth/breadth of knowledge.] 21:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ****'''Merge''' – I don't see how "familiarity/comfort" is different from "social context". "Professional" is clearly about depth/breadth of knowledge: compare de-5, which says "this user has a command of the German language like a professional writer". BTW, isn't the word "professorial" ridiculous? ] 22:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **En-4 applies equally to a two-year old child and Shakespeare. En-5 merely says that someone is a professional (ie lawyer, accountant, architect, doctor etc) not they are professional writers. (And yes it is.) ] 11:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. Having En-5 is redundant enough; there is no need for more of this nonsense. What's next, En-7, "academician level"? En-8, "inventor of the English language"?—] • (]); 19:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **I don't think en-5 is redundant. I can write scientific articles in English, but have never lived among native speakers, the scope of my vocabulary is still a bit biased, and there are even still a few cases where I'm not quite sure whether to use the past tense or the present perfect tense. So I'm en-5 but not en-4. ] 22:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - What the other 5 ''mean'' may need to be redefined (and so, arguing whether 5 is different than 6 is pointless). But, do not create 6th level babel cats, if you please. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. We don't need to start promoting grade inflation in the Babel boxes. If people are breaking the system by overstating their proficiency in English (as the author suggests above), then we need to change the system in a basic way, not apply this kind of Band-aid. --] 09:28, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| Classic "not" category. Categorizing by things we don't own does not help Misplaced Pages in any way. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nom. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *<s>'''Delete'''</s> - The category text implies that these users are interested in ], but that's not necessarily the case given the userbox text. –] 00:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - The ubx was modelled on the <nowiki>{{</nowiki>User Sustainable Living<nowiki>}}</nowiki> ubx. The green background and earth were meant to signify interest in ]. --] 20:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *If '''Rename''' is a permissible vote, I so vote, else my vote is '''Delete'''. My problem isn't so much with the category itself as the negative and indirect framing of the category name. If we're going to categorise Wikipedians, the meaning of the categorisation should be affirmative and direct, not based on the implications of the category. And ideally as short as possible. '''Category:Carless Wikipedians''' or '''Category:Wikipedians who practise sustainable living''' would be good by me, but not the name the category currently holds. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]){{#if:1 June 2007| 1 June 2007|}}.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
| **"Carless Wikipedians" would still be a "not" category. ] (]) 01:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ***I'm not so sure; there are ''not''s and ''not''s. It seems to me a little simplistic to say "The name contains a negator (e.g. ''non''- or -''less'') and the category is therefore a 'not'-category." '''Category:Non-redhead Wikipedians''' is unacceptable on its face; '''Category:Wikipedians who practise non-western medicine''' is clearly acceptable. And does either its (approximate) synonymy with '''Category:Wikipedians who do not enjoy sex''' or the negator ''a''- render '''Category:Asexual Wikipedians''' invalid? If one becomes listed under '''Category:Carless Wikipedians''' it is because one has made a point of not owning a car, either by manually categorising oneself or by using a template that automatically does so (that is, it is an opt-in category); so the category becomes limited to those who do not drive cars for an articulable reason. A similar argument applies to non-smokers. If there is, for example, an articulable difference between "non-smokers" and "people who do not smoke" (and I feel there is -- that "non-smokers" have made a conscious choice to reject smoking whereas "people who do not smoke" may simply have never taken up the habit), then it's not quite so obvious that '''Category:Non-smoking Wikipedians''' is a ''not''-category. I'm not arguing against avoiding ''not''-categories, just against using that principle as a mechanical <!-- was "mindlessly binding", but I switched to cooler language -- ] --> rule rather than a guideline that alerts us to cases that then must be judged on their own merits. | |||
| ****--] 08:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *****We allow some "not" categories, but only ones that are beneficial to the encyclopedia. For instance, ]. The whole reasoning behind having the "not" category rule is that not categories almost always do not help Misplaced Pages in any way. For instance, it does not help Misplaced Pages in any way to know who does not own a car, or who does not smoke. It doesn't help Misplaced Pages to know who consciously made the decision to not smoke. It does, on the other hand, help to know who is interested in topics that have enough articles for such people to collaborate on. If a "not" category can help Misplaced Pages, then I wouldn't mind it existing, and I don't think categories are mechanically nominated just because they are a not category. The whole purpose of user categories is to improve the encyclopedia, which I believe this category does not, under any name. ] (]) 18:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ******Very well, then. If what you're saying is that utility to Misplaced Pages is the criterion for distinguishing a ''not'' worthy of keeping from a ''not'' worthy of deletion, then there's no further need to discuss the ''not'' question here -- lack of utility to Misplaced Pages is a stronger and more interesting objection that can justify deletion on its own. --] 18:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - There is a ] category. Is that a "Classic 'not' category"? I'm just trying to understand the rules. --] 01:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **It is definitely a "not" category by my definition. Unfortunately when I nominated that for deletion last, it ended in no consensus for some reason. We really don't need to categorize people who don't smoke, and have been considering a renomination of that soon. ] (]) 01:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *<s>'''Neutral'''</s> '''Delete cat''' - i don't own a car so i won't care if i don't own a userbox. -- ] - <small>]</small> 02:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **Please see the notification box at the top of the page. This discussion is only about the category, not the userbox. The userbox will be kept. ] (]) 02:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *<s>'''Provisional Keep'''</s> '''Rename if possible, else Delete''' - I'm also having the same problem understanding what is wrong with this userbox. Exactly what policy or guideline is it violating? I also have the userboxes for non-smoker, non-drinker, drug-free, and atheist, all of which are "not" categories. If a userbox must "help Misplaced Pages" then how does, for example, a userbox listing what university you attend help Misplaced Pages? Show me the basis for this deletion request and then I may change my vote. -- ] 02:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **First and formost, please see the notification box at the top of the page. This discussion is only about the category, not the userbox. The userbox will be kept. Second of all, there is (rightly) no category associated with drug-free wikipedians (category was deleted here a while back) or for alcohol-free wikipedians. Athiest counts as a religion category, and is not considered a "not" category. The non-smoking category can be explained with ], and the category should be deleted. As for "how does, for example, a userbox listing what university you attend help Misplaced Pages?" Users with such categories can reasonably be expected to collaborate on topics relating to the university. There is no article titled ] or anything similar, so there is nothing for such users to collaborate on. If the intent of this category is for people who support sustainable living, they are free to join ]. ] (]) 02:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ***I didn't ask for an explanation of the ] category. I merely asked, "Is that a 'Classic "not" category'?" Ditto, the ] category. As for alcohol and drug-free Wikipedians there is the ] category. --] 05:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ****OK, I somehow missed the difference between "category" and "userbox" before. I have to agree with 7Kim above though, being a "not" category isn't a good reason to delete a category. As I mentioned earlier, "atheist Wikipedians" is a "not" category, because it lists people who do not believe in gods. However, there is ''utility'' to the "atheist" category. Still, one could ask, "What's next? Wikipedians who don't believe in Santa Claus?" You can see why that argument fails, just because some "not" categories are ridiculous does not mean there are no "not" categories that can be useful. If a more useful category for "car-free Wikipedians" could be used instead then it should be renamed to that category, if not, then delete it. -- ] 12:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. a "not" category. What's next, ]? <span style="font-family:serif;">—]✰]</span> 02:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - "not-category", with (imho) only tenuous ties to eco-issues. - ] 03:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' - Following the logic of the ] category I propose renaming the category as "'''Car-free Wikipedians'''" or, alternatively, "'''Wikipedians who support the car-free movement'''." This would link the category to the ] article and to a movement that exists external to the Misplaced Pages community. Car-free Wikipedians could reasonably be expected to be interested in collaborating on the ] article and some of the several related articles listed in its "See also" section. Does this solve the problem? --] 06:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **The logic for creating ] would be the same as the straight-edge Wikipedian category, as there are a few articles such people in the category could reasonably be expected to collaborate on. I don't think, however, that a rename of this category would work, since I doubt all current members of the category support the movement. You could make a new category, though. ] (]) 09:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **Those categories are all essentially the same thing as "I don't drive a car." If you want to categorized Wikipedians by transport, don't categorize them by what they don't use. Categorize them by what they ''do'' use, for example, ].<span style="font-family:serif;">—]✰]</span> 15:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - Okay, I'm going to create "Car-free Wikipedians" and modify the ubx to add users to that category. I'll drop the ] stuff. I've already notified, on their talk pages, all of the users using the ubx that there is an ongoing discussion about deleting the category the box is associated with. --] 10:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **Please give this discussion at least a few more days before spinning off an exact clone of the category under discussion here. "Car-free Wikipedians" means exactly the same thing as "Wikipedians who don't own automobiles". <span style="font-family:serif;">—]✰]</span> 15:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ***"Car-free Wikipedians" is definitely not "an exact clone of the category under discussion here." It follows the logic of the ] category and links the category to the ] article and to a movement that exists external to the Misplaced Pages community. --] 21:47, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **May I suggest something that obviates the "not" objection we keep hearing? '''Category:Wikipedians who use public transit''' would do so nicely. --] 18:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ***Agreed, "Car-free" Wikipedians still means wikipeidians who don't own a car, whereas "Wikipedians who support the car-free movement" is a different type of category and would work along the lines of the Straight-Edge Wikipedians cat. (I still don't think we should have categories for Wikipedians who support/oppose anything, but that is a different debate alltogether). Ideally I'd like this to be renamed to ] if kept. ] (]) 18:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - The rationale for avoiding "not" categories goes back over months of discussions. Essentially the idea is: 1.) We should avoid all-inclusive categories. 2.) 2 categories covering the same topic (differing in one is positive and the other negative) would together be essentially "all-inclusive". 3.) Therefore one of the two should be deleted. 4.) typically the "negative" (also known as the "not"-based category) should be deleted, since the positive is more likely to be useful for positive collaboration (whether direct or indirect), and the negative form is more likely to be divisive or inflammatory. - Therefore, since we have ] and ], one of them should be deleted, and in this case, it's clearly the negative form. It doesn't matter if we call it "Car-free", or whatever, it's still the negative form, or in other words, a "not" category, and so it should be deleted. I hope this helps clarify. - ] 19:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **The problem with the "a non-'not' category exists" argument is that not everyone uses the category if it applies to them. So, just because somebody doesn't use the "I drive a car" category doesn't mean that they don't drive a car. "I do" means you do, "I don't" means you don't, having neither could mean either. Thus the existence of an "I do X" category does not by itself obviate the utility of an "I avoid X" category. -- ] 05:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' This is worth exactly what you all paid for it, but I would suggest that the ''not''-ness of a category should not be viewed as cause for deletion in and of itself, but as a flag that alerts us that other reasons for deletion may exist. Looking back over history, it seems to me that categories labelled as ''not''s, when deleted, have always had other arguments against them -- lack of Wiki-utility, redundancy, divisiveness, silliness, irrelevance, overly broad scope, &c. In editing, the use of passive voice is not itself bad, but extensive use of passive voice serves as a good predictor for the presence of weasel words, unsourced assertions, and POV problems. So too with category management -- a negatively framed category title or definition is not itself bad, but serves as a good predictor of a valid cause for deletion. --] 19:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Speedy delete''' - The category is empty--] 00:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' Firstly, if it is empty I don't know why- I am in it! (or at least display the image) Secondly, the majority of the population ''do'' own cars, so much so that not-owning one has become a source of comment, and thus earns a catagory. ] 12:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **The category is empty because the creator created a new category, and modified the associated userbox template to place users in the other category instead. You will find yourself under ] now. --] 13:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *** Ok, I understand no. No objections, I see that I didn't realy understand. ] 11:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' if it's been replaced--I think it was useful: it indicates a certain attitude towards life and a likely interest in a range of topics. ''']''' 22:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - If this results in delete, which it looks like it will, I will consider ] to be '''speedy deletable''' as meaning the same exact thing (While the category description says otherwise, the name of the category needs to reflect that, which it doesn't). The first thing people will think when they see "Car-Free" will be people that do not have a car, not people who support the car free movement. If you want to have that category, which is fine by me, please rename it to what I said would be acceptable, ] or ]. Since "Car-free Wikipedians" can reasonably be assumed to mean Wikipedians who don't own a car (despite the description), I think it would be a valid G4 speedy deletion as "substatially identical" to this category. Once again, I encourage you to create a category whose name does not reflect the reason why this category is about to be deleted. ] (]) 04:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **'''Comment''' - I strongly disagree that ] means "the same exact thing" as ]. I came to agree with the arguments that the latter category should be deleted but I do not agree that your ''assumptions'' about what people will think about ] are grounds for negating what is indicated in the category description. Even assuming for the sake of argument only, that the two category names mean the same thing, that is not simply not one of the ]. Since ] was created days '''before''' ] was deleted then criterion G4 does not apply--it is patently not "A copy, by any title, of a page that was deleted." At a minimum, a "]" and, therefore, any discussion of deleting ] should '''not''' take place using the speedy delete method. --] 08:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ***'''Response to comment''' - In the many Misplaced Pages discussions I've been in, or even just quietly lurked as a reader, I've often encountered the accusation of ], but typically it's just one person accusing another of quoting proper process. Thank you for giving us a great example of true WikiLawyering. And yes, that's fallacious reasoning, and the new cat ''will'' be listed above for speedy deletion, if appropriate, such as if this discussion results in deletion. - ] 21:49, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ****''']''' - "Occasionally, editors who engage in semantic discussions about the language of a policy or guideline ... will be accused of WikiLawyering. In these cases, it may make sense to instead assume good faith and engage in the discussion productively rather than tarring those editors with the WikiLawyering brush." --] 01:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *****As I said, I've often seen that happen. It just doesn't happen to be true in this case. Or more directly: Claiming that: ''"Since ] was created days '''before''' ] was deleted then criterion G4 does not apply..."'' - is quite clearly ] (points 2, 3, and 4 of that page), since the category was created as a result of this ''currently'' ongoing deletion discussion. - ] 07:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename to ]''' as ] makes this a notable topic to be interested in, and the amount of discussion here implies that these users will exert the same effort in improving articles about the car-free movement. –] 06:42, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] has been deleted. I placed the text below on ] and on ]: | |||
| ::Administrator ] has already expressed her/his ]. ] is not a clone of ]. "Car-free Wikipedians" is not a "not-category" but rather about an affirmatiion of support for or adherence to the ]. In this, it follows the logic of the ] category. The category links users to the ] article and to a movement that exists external to the Misplaced Pages community. Car-free Wikipedians could reasonably be expected to be interested in collaborating on the ] article and some of the several related articles listed in its "See also" section. None of this was true of the now deleted ]. | |||
| ::Misplaced Pages's ] states that, "Where reasonable doubt exists, discussion using another method under the deletion policy should occur instead." There is reasonable doubt about whether the two categories in questions are substantially the same. Also, since ] was created days '''before''' ] was deleted then criterion G4 does not apply--it is patently not "A copy, by any title, of a page that ''was'' '''deleted'''." Furthermore, as the creator of both categories, I can state unequivocally that ] was created as a ] effort to address valid concerns about ], which I never voted to keep. Reasonable doubts exist, therefore, any discussion of deleting ]--if such a discussion takes place at all--should '''not''' take place using the speedy delete method. --] 09:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| --] 09:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - Ok, after going therough related articles, categories, and reference links, what I've essentially found are either remote villages which prefer donkey travel, islands, and cycling paths and locations. Very little is about the eco-concerns, and more about supporting cycling. That said, there are several organisations interested in this, and obviously Wikipedians interested in this, so some sort of Wikipedian category related to this issue would seem appropriate as a sub-cat of ]. It definitely needs a rename ("carfree" is one such name), and an effort needs to be made to keep this from duplicating ]. - ] 22:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| Useless category. Does anyone ''not'' support the development of renewable energy? Might as well have a category for people who support improved health care, improved human rights, etc. Also, "Renewable Energy" should not be capitalized, so at least needs a rename. I'd also support a rename to ]. | |||
| *'''Delete''' or rename to ] as nom. ] (]) 08:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' to ] as a large topic of interest. –] 00:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' to ] - says essentially the same thing, while being potentiallly less divisive. - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' to ] - more appropriate and a large topic with potential to interest many. ] 11:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - Now that I think of it, ] might be a slightly better name. Thoughts? ] (]) 19:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' to ]. '''Wikipedians interested in ...''' seems to be a more well-established convention than '''Wikipedians who support ...''', preferable due to divisiveness issues, and safe from the vagueness surrounding the meaning of "support". --] 19:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' First of all, if this category was "useless" there would not be 459 Wikipedians who are a member of this category and support the development of renewable energy. There are forces which are AGAINST the development of renewable energy; these people are mostly stakeholders in the established fossil fuel (oil, coal, gas, etc.) industry which work against government funding of renewable energy research in universities. By being a member of this category, one explicitly supports the funding of university and government research programs to develop the necessary scientific research to create practical renewable energy products on the market. I think that changing this category's name to "...interested in Renewable Energy" changes the original meaning of this category, from one of advocacy to one of simple "interest". Thanks. ] 18:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **]. User categories should facilitate collaboration, not advocacy. <span style="font-family:serif;">—]✰]</span> 23:01, 2 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *** That's a point, but as an earlier user mentioned, who does NOT support the development of renewable energy? (It's only 0.0001% of the population who's got their hands on the fossil fuel industry.) Therefore, having this section does facilitate collaboration, since 99.9999% of our users would support the development of renewable energy since it is in their own interest. So if this topic doesn't cause division, then why remove it? (It takes up only like 10 kilobytes of memory in Misplaced Pages's database, and therefore the value it brings outnumbers it cost.) ] 04:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===May 28=== | |||
| ==== Category:WikiProject Irish Music participants ==== | |||
| :{{lc|WikiProject Irish Music participants}} | |||
| :'''''Merge''' into ], duplicate.'' -- <i>] <sup>]</sup></i> 01:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Procedural comment''' shouldn't this be a user cats for discussion? ] 20:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Moved''' from ]. --] <small>] • (])</small> 19:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Ask WikiProject to decide on one, then speedy merge''' - This goes back to the members vs. participants debate. The best way to deal with this is ask the WikiProject which they prefer. ] (]) 23:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Reverse merge''' to "...participants". (Yes, ask the WikiProject, but, I still prefer that "members" be removed.) - ] 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===May 27=== | |||
| ==== Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: Queen's University ==== | |||
| :'''Propose renaming''' ] to ] | |||
| :'''Nominator's Rationale:''' {{{3|'''Rename''', To differentiate ] from ] in Canada. ] 16:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC)}}} | |||
| *'''Note''' moved from ]. --] <small>] • (])</small> 18:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''rename/speedy rename''' per nom. ] (]) 23:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Speedy rename''' per nom. –] 06:43, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ===May 26=== | |||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Delete''' - ] 10:42, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| "Local" varies for every person on Misplaced Pages, so as is, this category is essentially useless for collaborative purposes. A way to salvage it would be to make it in to a parent category and change the name to ], and have subcategories for each city. Unfortunately, we we would have to ask everyone in the category which city's local history they are interested in to determine this, so I don't know if this is salvagable. As is, this category is no more useful than if someone just wrote they were interested in local history on their userpage. "Local History" shouldn't be capitalized, so this at minimum needs a rename. | |||
| *'''Neutral''' pending more discussion, but leaning towards delete. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Strong Delete''' - At first I was thinking that this could be kept ''if'' the inclusion criteria involved local culture and society in general as sociological items. However, it's clear from the category introduction that this is not the case. This merely duplicates every "Wikipedian by location" category into one sprawling category which is potentially all-inclusive. - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. This just isn't useful unless it provides a means for finding Wikipedians interested in the history of some particular locality. Which is an interesting idea, but I don't see the possibility of it without building and filling a perfectly gargantuan category tree. Even then, how local one can go without passing the notability horizon is not an argument I care to be present for. --] 19:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''No consensus''' - ] 10:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| This category became more or less obsolete when ] came along. I don't think this category was useful at any point time, but It certainly isn't useful now. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *Delete, not particularly useful any more. The "]" is over, nothing more to end. ] ] 02:40, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' - Some may consider ] to be a continuation of the "boxwar". I'm going to be semi-cliche and suggest that if this is deleted, so too should all Wikipedian by Misplaced Pages issue categories, else it should not be deleted. - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Delete''' - ] 10:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Not something Misplaced Pages needs a category for. I'm sure everyone supports the revival of various things, but having categories for such things will not improve the encyclopedia. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' or at least rename to "Wikipedians who listen to..." - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''speedy delete at author's request'''. ] 11:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| "The wikipedians who have joined ]". Sorry, we don't need categories for unofficial userspace groups. Similar categories have been deleted many times in the past. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - Premature. If this "group" survives in Misplaced Pages: space, ''then'' such a category might be useful. - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page, if any, or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| {{ct}} '''speedy delete.'''--] 11:16, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| 0-level category. Mass deleted . Listing for another admin to verify, since this specific one hasn't been deleted before. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Speedy delete''' as nom. ] (]) 02:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Note''' - Added ], which also needs deletion. ] (]) 07:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| {{cb}} | |||
| === May 25 === | |||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''No consensus''' - Speedily renaming to ] per proper caps. - ] 10:39, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Does not aid collaboration in any way. At all. Also, wasn't something like this deleted before? – ] 15:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - I think all these autograph pages should be deleted. They are all a waste of space and people's time. However, until that happens, a category to group them all might not be a bad idea (in order to make it easier for a group MfD). ] (]) 19:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Please see ]. ] ] 00:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' The category helps autograph pages to become shorter in that they don't need to include a list of autograph pages anymore. ] ] 00:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **'''Comment''' They never ''needed'' to in the first place. It's only been part of autograph pages because some people have chosen to do that to further their <s>inappropriate use of Misplaced Pages</s> socialization. ] 00:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' with extreme prejudice. Misplaced Pages is not your high school yearbook. ] 00:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Strong delete''', utterly and completely useless, unless this is some sort of holding pen so we can delete them all at once later. Why on earth would we categorize unencyclopedic user subpages? --] <small>]</small> 01:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' - I suppose that I could note that ] signs such pages, and supports their use, but instead I think I'll simply point out that this discussion is about the category, ''not'' whether you support having such pages on Misplaced Pages. Oh, and keep because: If we've got 'em, then grouping 'em as a sub-cat of ] would seem to make sense. - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep and rename''' to ]. This serves as a useful ] because the autograph pages in it are often discussed. –] 20:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - per Sean William. We don't need to go as far as adding on a category to these useless subpages. I imagine the only use for it (besides tracking them) would be for these users to find random users' pages to sign (as they often seem to do). ] 00:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''', a category that shouldn't contain anything anyway. <span style="font-family:serif;">—]✰]</span> 03:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''delete'''. ] (]) 09:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| No possible collaborative use; ] a webhost or social networking site. (])<sup>(])</sup> 11:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :*'''Delete''' this is essentially a NOT category (and don't come down here saying this helps collaboration on feminism).--] 18:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - "This lists Wikipedians who are against female haircutting" - Sorry, we don't need a category for this. ] (]) 19:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - This is a major issue in some countries of the world, as well as some religious sects/groups/whatever. However, I can't tell if this is the intent of the category, or just a category of those who find long hair on women attractive, and are opposed to it being cut. '''Keep''' if the former is true, else '''Delete''' if the latter is true. - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **If that were the case (which there is no indication of either way), this category would still need a rename, so deletion looks like the best option. ] (]) 09:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''speedy delete''' per previous consensus on admins per country categories. ] ] 02:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| This one must have slipped through the cracks of the Administrators by country UCFD a while back. In either case, I think that established enough precedent for this to be speedyable. ] (]) 02:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Speedy delete''' as nom. ] (]) 02:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. Should have been deleted with the others. Doesn't help build the encyclopedia, we don't need to subcategorise admins by nationality. <span style="font-family: Verdana">]]</span> 02:30, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ==== Category:Audio file editors ==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Speedy Rename''' - ] 10:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :'''Speedy Rename''' ] to ] - added Wikipedians and re-arrange order. - ] 08:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Speedy rename''' feel free to close. ] (]) 00:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ===May 24=== | |||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Rename''' to ] (per ). - ] 10:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)] | |||
| Rename to ] for proper capitalisation. | |||
| *'''Rename''' As nominator — ]</font>] <small>(a.k.a ''Tellyaddict'')</small> 15:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. It does not appear to help the project in any way. --] 11:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' - A potential to collaborate on a single article is not worth having a category. Rename if no consensus to delete. ] (]) 19:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' to ] - ] 10:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Rename''' to ] -- (]<sub>]</sub><sup><span style="position: relative; left: -16px; margin-right: -16px;">]</span></sup>) 00:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - If you go to the article, it appears as if "gedit" is the proper capitalization (lowercase G and no capital E) so if renamed, needs to be renamed to ]. ] (]) 10:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ===May 23=== | |||
| ====]==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''speedy deleted''' per creator request below. ] (]) 23:34, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Can't be true, does not help Misplaced Pages in any way. Categories like these are in the essay on what categories not to make. ] (]) 23:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' as nominator. ] (]) 23:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete:''' Didn't know it was frowned upon. '''<span style="font-size:95%;font-variant:small-caps;font-family:Trebuchet MS"><font color="#229922">]</font></span>''' ] 23:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''', non-useful category. ''''']]''''' 23:23, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ===May 21=== | |||
| ==== Sony PlayStation ==== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate regarding the category or categories above. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.'' | |||
| The result of the debate was {{{1|}}} '''Do not rename''' the PS2 or PS3 categories. '''Rename''' ] to ]. - The ] lists several synonyms, including: PSone, PSOne, PS one, or PS1. Simply chose "1" to match 2 and 3. - ] 09:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *Relisting these to discuss whether "Sony" should be used, and about how (if wanted) to disambiguate between general PlayStation users and those who use the ] (and the ]). - ] 23:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **'''Rename''' ] to ] | |||
| **'''Rename''' ] to ] | |||
| **'''Rename''' ] to ] | |||
| *'''Neutral''' - hoping for more discussion. - ] 23:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Just PlayStation, please.''' I work with Sony guys, and even they don't call it the Sony PlayStation.--] 23:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **Though I could get behind changing the PlayStation category to "Wikipedians who play PSone games", since it has definitely been overwritten in users' minds.--] 14:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Include Sony''', without it we have a sentence containing "play play", which is obnoxious. --] <small>]</small> 04:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *There's no need to disambiguate for PlayStation in general (broad/unnecessary overlap; subcats do the job), nor for an empty ] (overcategorization for only 3 subcats). –] 07:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| **I tend to agree with this. I think a better idea for this would be to create ] (since many games are multi-platform, as you mention in an above nom) and change the console categories to ] or ]. That's another nom, however. For now, I think we should go with the article names, which means '''rename''' per MS. ] (]) 04:49, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div> | |||
| ] | |||
Latest revision as of 02:23, 3 February 2022
Redirect to:
| This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:
|