View source for Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 June 14

<noinclude><div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 0 auto; padding: 0 1px 0 0; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; font-size:10px">
{| width = "100%"
|-
! style="width:50%; text-align:left;"  | <span style="color:grey;">&lt;</span> [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 June 13|June 13]]
! style="width:50%; text-align:right;" | [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 June 15|June 15]] <span style="color:grey;">&gt;</span>
|}
</div></noinclude>

=== June 14 ===
==== Category:Homeopathic remedies ====   
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:''  '''reverse merge.''' There is clear consensus to change one direction or another, and no interest in keeping both. There is absolutely no consensus as to which direction to go, however. Under such a circumstance, there's no policy to govern a decision, but leaving both is not an option. I'm more convinced by the reverse merge arguments than the merge arguments, in that "preparations" seems like an attempt to paper over some negative connotations of the earlier, more dominant term. But the distinction is extremely subtle, and not at all apparent to the lay reader. It is possible that there is a better term for this category, but "preparations" doesn't seem to me to be it.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 08:21, 5 July 2010 (UTC) 

:'''Propose merging''' [[:Category:Homeopathic remedies]] to [[:Category:Homeopathic preparations]]
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' Redundant categories, matching [[List of homeopathic preparations]] (whose name was discussed extensively a while back) should be preferred. - [[User talk:2over0|2/0]] <small>([[Special:Contributions/2over0|cont.]])</small> 17:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
*I believe there have been several discussions of this, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_April_2#Category:Homeopathic_remedies most recently this past April]. [[User:Shawn in Montreal|Shawn in Montreal]] ([[User talk:Shawn in Montreal|talk]]) 23:12, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
:: That was April 2009. Do you think that that demonstrates a consensus for merging the other way? Regardless, I think these categories are redundant and should be merged one way or the other. - [[User talk:2over0|2/0]] <small>([[Special:Contributions/2over0|cont.]])</small> 23:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
:::I do agree with you on a merge but I don't have any strong views on which way, sorry. I'm sure others will. [[User:Shawn in Montreal|Shawn in Montreal]] ([[User talk:Shawn in Montreal|talk]]) 23:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
::::IMO, the merge as you suggest would be less-POV, in the sense that it should be more palatable to those who hold that homeopathy doesn't "remedy" anything. [[User:Shawn in Montreal|Shawn in Montreal]] ([[User talk:Shawn in Montreal|talk]]) 02:06, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
<hr style="width:50%;" />
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — [[User:Explicit|<span style="color:#B22222;">'''ξ'''</span>]][[User talk:Explicit|<sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit</sup>]] 21:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->
*'''Question'''. What is the rationale for preferring "preparations" over "remedies"? Is it simply that there is a dispute as to whether homeopathic preparations "remedy" anything? While I'm sympathetic to that view, in the last discussion, I was convinced by the argument that these are most commonly referred to as "homeopathic remedies". Is this not the case? I think we should call them whatever they are usually called in English. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 06:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
:*They are referred to as medicines (preferred by Homeopaths), remedies (prefered by advertisers) and preparations is also common, and was found to be most neutral presentation on wikipedia - partly for the reason you give. All are common names, but wikipedia would never accept "medicines" so preparations would be the most neutral while still following common. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 13:21, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' - I rubbed my eyes in disbelief when I saw that this category was at CFD again, because the last time it came up I felt that we had rendered a definitive decision. So for those who can't work up the energy to click on the link to the previous CFD, here is the main paragraph I wrote making the case for retaining [[:Category:Homeopathic remedies]]:
::I would agree that we don't want to use a name that is merely or primarily promotional. However, I don't really think that "Homeopathic remedies" is an unacceptably problematic term in and of itself. To begin with, when I said that it was the "'''standard term'''", I meant first and foremost that '''historically they have always been known and referred to as "Homeopathic remedies"'''. In addition, the term "Homeopathic remedies" is vastly more widely used than "Homeopathic preparations", which is amply confirmed by the huge disparity in G-hits: 22,600 for "Homeopathic preparations" versus 1,160,000 for "Homeopathic remedies". Moreover, the scholarly publications indexed by Google Scholar do not eschew the term in the least -- quite the opposite: 921 hits for "Homeopathic preparations" versus 4,270 hits for "Homeopathic remedies". And the term is used even by those who are strongly opposed to homeopathy, as you can see by the following title (from the American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 1995): "Why pharmacists should not sell ''homeopathic remedies''". (italics added) In short, that is simply what they are called, and what they are known as by the public, so it seems to me that that is the term we should use as well. Therefore I Oppose Renaming.
:I have nothing further to add. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 12:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
:*That is '''factually incorrect''' (I can bold too!). Historically the term has been "homeopthic medicine" and "tincture", the terms favoured by promoters and only more recently regulated against. [[List of homeopathic preparations]] should be the parent article of both categories (which I agree shoud be merged and split), but per our consensus at List of homeopathic preparations, the need for consistence across wikipedia per [[WP:MOS]], and our requirement to be [[WP:NPOV|neutral]], the '''standard''' term that meets these criteria should be used, and that is "preparation". <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 13:52, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
::*It would appear that we could use some scholarly input on this point. "Homeopathic remedies" has been used for a very long time, but I do not know the exact year that it came into use. Obviously other terms have also been used, but at some point in the past "Homeopathic remedies" became the dominant term -- again, I cannot say the exact year, but perhaps a scholar of the subject could pinpoint that for us. All the same, the ''larger point remains unchallenged: even in Google Scholar, "Homeopathic remedies" is far and away more widely used than "homeopathic preparations"''. (As for the purported but ''non-existent'' "consensus at List of homeopathic preparations", I've already addressed this in my comment below.) [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 14:49, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
**{{ec}}The term used by those opposed to homeopathy is "water" (or sugar, or alcohol, depending on the solvent). <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 13:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''' merge. Seems silly to have both, and preparations is more general and neutral. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 13:11, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
**Actually they should be split in two: "Homeopathic preparations" and "Substances used in homeopathy". Present system is unclear. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 13:18, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

::*Would you care to respond to what I said above? I don't believe you did last time. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 13:22, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
:::* Sure. Medicine, treatments, remedies, tinctures and preparations are all common. Preparations has the benefit of no impled POV, which we should avoid per our core principles. You are also adding things that clearly are not remedies to teh category. That's just confusing. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 13:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
::::*Excuse me, but you still haven't responded in any way to the substance of my detailed findings on usage of the terms. As for placing certain articles in [[:Category:Homeopathic remedies]], I have done so only after scrutinizing the articles in question and determining that each included text which noted ingredients identifiable as "Homeopathic remedies". [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 13:41, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::*You've shown that all terms are common, and we should use one that doesn't assert a POV. Preparation is used in scientific reviews, as is remedy when they quote the manufactures name. We should avoid POV and stick to a neutral label. The spliting of the category I have proposed would solve the other problem. Homeopathic products also gets a lot of hits, and would be acceptable per policy. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 14:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::*Excuse me (again) - but what the G-hits clearly show is that one term (Homeopathic remedies) is ''far more widely used'' than the other term (Homeopathic preparations). And that is because "Homeopathic remedies" is, in fact, the '''standard term'''. I realize that rubs you the wrong way, but it is undeniably the case. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 15:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::::* No need to apologise, it doesn't rub me at all. You've shown they're all common, and in neutral sources (though that's not very important) preparations or products is more used. As they are all common, and the standard homeopaths term of medicines is unacceptable, we should choose a neutral term per our core policies. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 16:00, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Reverse merge''' per Cgingold and per the previous CFD. "Homeopathic remedies" appears to me to be far, far more commonly used. Even in google scholar, "remedies" is used 5 times as often as "preparations". I support using the one that is more commonly used, even though I am sympathetic to the view that one is more POV than the other. I'd rather have ''some'' form of merge performed than having this closed as "no consensus" — it's silly to have two categories for the exact same thing. In that regard, I also note that {{cat|Homeopathic remedies}} is much older and when {{cat|Homeopathic preparations}} was created, there was no resulting consensus in the discussion to rename the category. Thus, the older one should prevail, even if the result here is "no consensus". [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 00:49, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
:*I'm really glad you brought up this last point. The decision in the previous CFD was very clear cut, and it was merely an oversight that the newly-created duplicate category {{c|Homeopathic preparations}} was not deleted at that time. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 12:23, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
::*If you want to delete the broader category then you'll have to start an appropriate discussion. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 12:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
:::*This IS in fact the appropriate discussion -- and I've just made it "official" (by tagging [[:Category:Homeopathic preparations]] with it's own CFM template). [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 12:36, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
::::* '''Strong oppose Preparations -> Remedies''' for [[WP:NPOV]] concerns, which can easily be addressed by using one of the other [[WP:COMMON]] names which doesn't have baggage (product, preparation, etc), and because it is a less broad category. See also '''[[List of homeopathic preparations]]''' which established a wikipedia consensus on the name.  <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 13:33, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::*I've read thru the talk section on [[List of homeopathic preparations]] and I do not agree with your assertion that it "established a wikipedia consensus on the name". The name of the article was changed despite the fact that there was very clearly ''no consensus to do so'' in that discussion. (I would also note that the proposed name change was not properly listed at [[Wikipedia:Requested moves]] as it should have been.) [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 14:30, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''' merging... '''no opinion''' as to which title to use. [[User:Blueboar|Blueboar]] ([[User talk:Blueboar|talk]]) 13:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''' merge. But... "remedies" is the more neutral title as it is found in four times as many articles in Google Scholar ([http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=%22Homeopathic+remedies%22+OR+%22homeopathic+remedy%22&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0] vs [http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=%22Homeopathic+preparations%22+OR+%22homeopathic+preparation%22&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0]) and twice as many PubMed abstracts ([http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&cmd=search&term=%22Homeopathic+remedies%22+OR+%22homeopathic+remedy%22] vs [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&cmd=search&term=%22Homeopathic+preparations%22+OR+%22homeopathic+preparation%22]). [[User:Fences and windows|<span style="background-color:white; color:red;">Fences</span>]]<span style="background-color:white; color:#808080;">&amp;</span>[[User talk:Fences and windows|<span style="background-color:white; color:black;">Windows</span>]] 17:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
**[[WP:NPOV]] is a core policy, which takes primacy over [[WP:COMMON]]. Preparation, medicine and remedy are all common, yet only preparation is neutral. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 17:12, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
* '''Support''' merge into Category '''Homeopathic preparations'''. The title remedies is not neutral. Homeopathic solutions are not a remedy or a cure. Homeopathic preparations are only possibly effective as a placebo effect. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 19:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support merge into Remedies'''. Even Ernst uses that term[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1874503/]. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 00:20, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
:*Thanks for this - an excellent link. It's for "A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy", published in the ''British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology''. While this ''review of reviews'' is by no means supportive of homeopathy, the author nonetheless uses the term "homeopathic remedies" throughout the article (16 times). Not once does he use the term "homeopathic preparations". [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 21:36, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Strong reverse merge'''. We've been here squillions of times, and the same reasons still apply: as discussed by others above, "homeopathic remedies" is the [[WP:COMMONNAME]] for these preparations. I am aware that opponents of homeopathy dislike the term, but if we start throwing out common terms because some people try to problematise them, then we will be in a real minefield. (Football clubs are not clubs in any usual sense of the word, they are businesses, so let's rename them; members of the X political party are not politicians, they are extortionists; the British monarchy is mostly German, so let's rename that ... and so.  Please folks, don't go there). --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#996600; cursor: not-allowed;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 17:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:*NPOV is non-negotiable. The word "remedies" implies it is effective. The word "preparations" is neutral. [[User:QuackGuru|QuackGuru]] ([[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]) 17:43, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:::And yet any number of non-homeopath academics, notably including Ernst in his strictly neutral review cited above, see fit to use the term "homeopathic remedies" - precisely because it is understood to be the proper/standard term for the items in question. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 20:54, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:::: I'd like to add a {{cn}} tag to your "precisely because it is understood to be the proper/standard term" assertion. That is your opinion. NPOV is clear, ''medicine'' and ''remedy'' are both unacceptable. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 18:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::You have yet to offer a plausible alternative explanation for the fact that "homeopathic remedies" is by far the ''preferred term'' among non-homeopath academics in their writings on the subject. I submit that that is because there IS no other explanation. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 22:07, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::: I'd still like to see a [[WP:RS]] for your assertion, however it is irrelevant as we have the core policy of [[WP:NPOV]]. <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Verbal|<b style="color:#C72">Verbal</b>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<span style="color:Gray;">chat</span>]]</small></span> 11:58, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::::My "assertion" is a simple inference based on the very clear disparity in frequency of use of the terms we are discussing -- a fact that you doggedly refuse to acknowledge, much less offer a plausible alternative explanation for. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 13:11, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''' merge into 'preparations' because this is a neutral term, as opposed to 'remedy' (which implies effectiveness); 'treatment' would also be acceptable IMHO, since not all treatments are effective. It doesn't matter which term is used most ''frequently'' - surely ''NPOV'' takes precedence. Commonly-used terms can be redirected to a neutral term. --[[User:TraceyR|TraceyR]] ([[User talk:TraceyR|talk]]) 18:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== People from Indonesia ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:''  '''rename'''. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 03:20, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Bandung, West Java]] to [[:Category:People from Bandung]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Blitar, East Java]] to [[:Category:People from Blitar]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Bogor, West Java]] to [[:Category:People from Bogor]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Madiun, East Java]] to [[:Category:People from Madiun]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Makassar, South Sulawesi]] to [[:Category:People from Makassar]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Medan, North Sumatra]] to [[:Category:People from Medan]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Palembang, South Sumatra]] to [[:Category:People from Palembang]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Pekalongan, Central Java]] to [[:Category:People from Pekalongan]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Semarang, Central Java]] to [[:Category:People from Semarang]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Surakarta, Central Java]] to [[:Category:People from Surakarta]]

:'''Nominator's rationale:''' No need to disambig these city categories in Indonesia. In all cases, the main articles are without the extra disambig. See also [[Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_April_13#Category:People_from_Surabaya.2C_East_Java|previous CfD]]. '''[[User:Lugnuts|<span style="color:#002bb8;">Lugnuts</span>]]''' ([[User talk:Lugnuts|talk]]) 17:54, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Fully agree''' [[User:Mayumashu|Mayumashu]] ([[User talk:Mayumashu|talk]]) 02:47, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''', the "X-town, Y-state" is generally a U.S. phenomena. --[[User:Soman|Soman]] ([[User talk:Soman|talk]]) 13:07, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:Mountains of Ulster County, New York ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:'' '''Withdrawn by nominator'''. Non-admin close. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 23:23, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

:{{Lc|Mountains of Ulster County, New York}}<br />
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' '''Delete'''. Category is redundant with Category:Catskills. [[User:Gjs238|Gjs238]] ([[User talk:Gjs238|talk]]) 15:32, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
:Not necessarily. There are glacial ridges along the Hudson that are probably notable even if we don't yet have articles on them, like [[Shaupeneak Ridge]] or [[Marlboro Mountain]]. They're not in the Catskills. Nor are any of the peaks along the [[Shawangunk Ridge]] in the Catskills, either (and how, pray tell, is the reader from outside New York or even outside the Hudson Valley supposed to know that Ulster County=Catskills (Not that, as I've said, it does). [[User:Daniel Case|Daniel Case]] ([[User talk:Daniel Case|talk]]) 18:57, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
::Agree that not all Ulster County mountains may be in Catskills.  However, for now the category is empty.  [[User:Gjs238|Gjs238]] ([[User talk:Gjs238|talk]]) 19:43, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

* '''Comments''' – please repopulate this category so the cfd can be properly considered (there were 3 articles, [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Mount_Tremper&action=historysubmit&diff=367984451&oldid=355931162 removed today] by [[User:Gjs238]]). [[:Category:Catskills]] contains articles on many topics other than mountains, so I would expect a keep or a rename (or a merge to [[:Category:Catskill High Peaks]], perhaps - and there is [[:Category:Mountains of New York]] to be considered). [[User:Occuli|Occuli]] ([[User talk:Occuli|talk]]) 20:40, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
:Not all of the notable Catskill peaks are High Peaks. As for just leaving it all in Mountains of New York, that category has the potential to be huge, with hundreds of entries, so I have always thought subdividing it by county was a good idea. [[User:Daniel Case|Daniel Case]] ([[User talk:Daniel Case|talk]]) 20:56, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
::* I am outside the Americas altogether and am not familiar with the area at all. My point is that an edit such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Mount_Tremper&action=historysubmit&diff=367984451&oldid=355931162 this] takes the article out of the 2 parent categories of [[:Category:Mountains of Ulster County, New York]] as well. It sounds as if ''''keep and repopulate'''' is the way to go. [[User:Occuli|Occuli]] ([[User talk:Occuli|talk]]) 21:12, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

*'''Retract''' my nomination.  I had originally considered the category to be in series/redundant with Category:Catskills. However, they are parallel cats.  [[User:Gjs238|Gjs238]] ([[User talk:Gjs238|talk]]) 21:38, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:National Monuments in New York ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:'' '''Withdrawn by nominator'''. Non-admin close. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 23:14, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

:{{Lc|National Monuments in New York}}<br />
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' '''Delete'''. Category is redundant with Category:National Park Service National Monuments in New York, itself a subcategory of Category:United States National Park Service areas in New York. [[User:Gjs238|Gjs238]] ([[User talk:Gjs238|talk]]) 14:36, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

* '''Keep''' and  repopulate; part of [[:Category:National Monuments of the United States by state]]. [[:Category:National Park Service National Monuments in New York]] and [[:Category:United States National Park Service areas in New York]] are more specific subcats. (See eg [[:Category:National Monuments in California]], arranged as I would expect.) [[User:Occuli|Occuli]] ([[User talk:Occuli|talk]]) 20:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
* '''Retract''' my nomination.  I was not aware that there are national monuments under the auspices of offices other than the NPS. I had ASSumed all national monuments were under the auspices of the NPS. [[User:Gjs238|Gjs238]] ([[User talk:Gjs238|talk]]) 21:28, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 

[[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:People from Tiverton ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:'' '''Rename'''. [[User:Od Mishehu|עוד&nbsp;מישהו]] [[User talk:Od Mishehu|Od&nbsp;Mishehu]] 19:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Tiverton]] to [[:Category:People from Tiverton, Devon]]
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' Consistency with [[:Category:Tiverton, Devon]] and article [[Tiverton, Devon]], and to avoid potential confusion with [[:Category:People from Tiverton, Rhode Island]], and the various other [[Tiverton]]s elsewhere.  [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 14:34, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

* '''Rename''' – to match corresponding article. [[User:Occuli|Occuli]] ([[User talk:Occuli|talk]]) 16:56, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' to disambiguate properly [[User:Mayumashu|Mayumashu]] ([[User talk:Mayumashu|talk]]) 02:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
* '''Rename''' per nominator to match head article, to disambiguate from other places similar named, and to match parent [[:Category:Tiverton, Devon]]. However, after the rename is done, [[:Category:People from Tiverton]] should be re-created as a disambiguation category using {{tl|category ambiguous}}. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#996600; cursor: not-allowed;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 20:22, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
* '''Rename''' – to match corresponding article as suggested above. [[User:FieldMarine|FieldMarine]] ([[User talk:FieldMarine|talk]]) 18:25, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:People from Neftchala ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:''  '''rename'''. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 03:22, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:People from Neftchala]] to [[:Category:People from Neftchala Rayon]]
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' for disambiguation and wider application.  [[Neftchala]] city is located within [[Neftchala Rayon]] and there is only one bio linked to this page.  Moreover the parent category is [[:Category:Neftchala Rayon]] [[User:Mayumashu|Mayumashu]] ([[User talk:Mayumashu|talk]]) 23:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
<hr style="width:50%;" />
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Od Mishehu|עוד&nbsp;מישהו]] [[User talk:Od Mishehu|Od&nbsp;Mishehu]] 14:06, 14 June 2010 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->

* '''Rename''' – per persuasive nom. [[User:Occuli|Occuli]] ([[User talk:Occuli|talk]]) 17:00, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:Left For Dead members ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:'' '''Delete'''. [[User:Od Mishehu|עוד&nbsp;מישהו]] [[User talk:Od Mishehu|Od&nbsp;Mishehu]] 19:11, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:{{Lc|Left For Dead members}}<br />
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' Redlink band per [[Left for dead]]. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (koavf)]]❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯ 19:03, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
<hr style="width:50%;" />
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Od Mishehu|עוד&nbsp;מישהו]] [[User talk:Od Mishehu|Od&nbsp;Mishehu]] 14:06, 14 June 2010 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->

* '''Delete''' – it can be recreated if the band gets an article. [[User:Occuli|Occuli]] ([[User talk:Occuli|talk]]) 16:54, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

* '''Delete''' - too narrow.  [[User:FieldMarine|FieldMarine]] ([[User talk:FieldMarine|talk]]) 18:23, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:Dimension Zero albums ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:'' '''Rename'''. [[User:Od Mishehu|עוד&nbsp;מישהו]] [[User talk:Od Mishehu|Od&nbsp;Mishehu]] 17:26, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Dimension Zero albums]] to [[:Category:Dimension Zero (Swedish band) albums]]
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' '''Rename'''. Propose disambiguating category name to match [[Dimension Zero (Swedish band)]]. [[Dimension Zero (American band)]] exists on WP.  [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 05:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
<hr style="width:50%;" />
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Od Mishehu|עוד&nbsp;מישהו]] [[User talk:Od Mishehu|Od&nbsp;Mishehu]] 13:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->

* '''Rename''' – to match corresponding article. [[User:Occuli|Occuli]] ([[User talk:Occuli|talk]]) 16:56, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:Oregon Sports Hall of Fame ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:''  '''delete'''. [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] ([[User talk:Courcelles|talk]]) 22:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
----

:{{Lc|Oregon Sports Hall of Fame}}<br />
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' as per deletion of other category pages for sub-national sport halls of fame [[User:Mayumashu|Mayumashu]] ([[User talk:Mayumashu|talk]]) 13:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. Per consensus these should be listified, which this already is at [[Oregon Sports Hall of Fame]]. These have been extensively mooted; I'm not sure I have anything to add that hasn't recently been brought up at related CFDs and DRVs. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 04:00, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:Anti-Israel ====   
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:''  '''merge and purge'''. As the supporters note, the distinction is too subtle for the Wikipedia reader. Moreover, we don't have anti-nation categories; there's no [[:category:Anti-Germany]] or [[:Category:Anti-France]]. There is a type of category for opposition to ''people'' of a particular nationality, in the subcategories of [[:Category:Anti-national sentiment]], but there is no category type for opposition to a particular nation itself. [[:Category:Anti-Zionism]] has a good header, pointing out that it unites many concepts without judging motivation too finely. It covers opposition to the existence or expansion of the state of Israel, among other things. However, this closing does not presume that all members of the current category are anti-Zionist, and if they are not, they should be removed from the target category.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 08:09, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

:'''Propose merging''' [[:Category:Anti-Israel]] to [[:Category:Anti-Zionism]]
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' '''Merge:''' "Anti-Israel" is synonymous with "Anti-Zionism", so there is no justification for separate categories. [[User:GCarty|GCarty]] ([[User talk:GCarty|talk]]) 12:21, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''': This category originally was created when people were trying to rename various articles with this title and was a POV move. [[User:Carolmooredc|CarolMooreDC]] ([[User talk:Carolmooredc|talk]]) 00:47, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''' the difference is too subtle to warrant different categories, and i believe all the articles which can be categorized as anti-israel can be safely categorized as anti-zionism. there are people who are anti-zionist but recognize israel as a nation with a right to exist within international law, but thats not relevant to the articles listed here.[[User:Mercurywoodrose|Mercurywoodrose]] ([[User talk:Mercurywoodrose|talk]]) 05:53, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''', the category was a pov statement from the beginning. --[[User:Soman|Soman]] ([[User talk:Soman|talk]]) 13:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' Not sure. Some people claim to be anti-Zionists (with the loaded connotation that brings) but not anti-Israel (as in the country or people itself). GCarty, can you provide some sources for me to read? --[[User:Shuki|Shuki]] ([[User talk:Shuki|talk]]) 22:42, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' Agree with Shuki on this one.  Anti-Zionist is not always Anti-Israel and vice-versa. Just as not all Jews are Pro-Israel and not all Israelis are Pro-Zionism. --[[User:nsaum75|<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.3em 0.3em 0.1em; class=texhtml">nsaum75</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:nsaum75|<span lang="he" xml:lang="he" dir="rtl">¡שיחת!</span>&lrm;]]</sup> 00:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)cmt
*'''Keep as separate categories''' - Anti-Israel refers to being against the nation of Israel, and often has anti-semitic reprecussioins. Anti-Zionism refers to being against the Jewish settlement in the land of Israel and the like. Two very different meanings. [[User:Linda Olive|Linda Olive]] ([[User talk:Linda Olive|talk]]) 23:26, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' Someone who is anti-Israel is also anti-Zionist, but not vice versa. In other words one can be opposed to idea of Zionism, but not support the idea that the county now known as Israel should fold up shop, unless s/he is anti-Israel as well.--''[[User:Brewcrewer|<span style="font family:Arial;color:green">brew</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Brewcrewer|<span style="font-family:Arial;color:#2E82F4">crewer</span>]] [[User talk:Brewcrewer|(yada, yada)]]'' 22:39, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. Zionism is merely the name of the Israeli national movement. To be oppose to Zionism is to be opposed to the existence of an independent Jewish state in any part of the historic Jewish homeland and thus opposed to Israel. I can see no distinquishing between the two. (Being pro-Zionist or pro-Israel has nothing whatever to do with whether one supports or not the expansion of Jewish settlement in territory captured by Israel in 1967.)  Those who claim to be anti-Zionist but not anti-Israel appear to favour the dismantling the present Zionist state (namely Israel), a contradiction. This must clearly be anti-Israel. [[User:Davshul|Davshul]] ([[User talk:Davshul|talk]]) 11:12, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:Planned invasions ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:''  '''rename''' as modified. — [[User:Explicit|<span style="color:#B22222;">'''ξ'''</span>]][[User talk:Explicit|<sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit</sup>]] 19:24, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned invasions]] to <s>[[:Category:Canceled invasions]]</s>[[:Category:Cancelled invasions]]
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' '''Rename'''. These invasions never happened. We can either do this, or go one step further and upmerge them into the newly applied parent category [[:Category:Canceled military operations]].--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 10:40, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' that's misspelled, it should be "cancelled". [[Special:Contributions/70.29.212.131|70.29.212.131]] ([[User talk:70.29.212.131|talk]]) 05:13, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
**Not in the States, it isn't.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 06:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
***'''Oppose''' [[WP:ENGVAR]]ious name, a dialect neutral name should be used. [[Special:Contributions/70.29.212.131|70.29.212.131]] ([[User talk:70.29.212.131|talk]]) 04:32, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
****You're right. There's an entire category tree called [[:Category:Cancelled projects and events]], in which [[:Category:Canceled military operations]] is the only one-L lama. Double-L, it is. Thanks for bringing this up.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 06:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' per revised nom. It makes sense to do this, to avoid the implication that these are planned and yet to happen in the future, as if WP could even have access to such information for categorization. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 09:18, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Future events ====
<noinclude>{{Delrevafd|date=2010 July 8}}</noinclude>
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:''  '''rename all''' as modified. — [[User:Explicit|<span style="color:#B22222;">'''ξ'''</span>]][[User talk:Explicit|<sup style="color:#000000;">xplicit</sup>]] 19:24, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future events]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming events]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled events]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future sporting events]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming sporting events]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled sporting events]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future spaceflights]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming spaceflights]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled spaceflights]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future human spaceflights]] to <s> [[:Category:Upcoming human spaceflights]]</s>[[:Category:Scheduled human spaceflights]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future manned Soyuz missions]] to <s> [[:Category:Upcoming manned Soyuz missions]]</s>[[:Category:Scheduled manned Soyuz missions]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future elections]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming elections]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled elections]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future elections in Asia]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming elections in Asia]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled elections in Asia]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future elections in Australia]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming elections in Australia]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled elections in Australia]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future elections in Canada]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming elections in Canada]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled elections in Canada]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future elections in Europe]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming elections in Europe]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled elections in Europe]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future elections in France]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming elections in France]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled elections in France]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future elections in Germany]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming elections in Germany]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled elections in Germany]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future elections in Spain]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming elections in Spain]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled elections in Spain]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future elections in the United Kingdom]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming elections in the United Kingdom]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled elections in the United Kingdom]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future elections in the United States]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming elections in the United States]]</s> [[:Category:Scheduled elections in the United States]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future election candidates]] to <s>[[:Category:Upcoming election candidates]]</s> [[:Category:Candidates in scheduled elections]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future products]] to [[:Category:Upcoming products]]
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' '''Rename'''. In somewhat the same vein as [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 May 31#Future infrastructure|this and other nominations]], I'm suggesting removing the "Future" from the title. Most of the subcategories of [[:Category:Future events]] use "Upcoming." This is not my favorite choice, since it still makes a [[WP:CRYSTAL]] claim of what will happen in the future, but these things do tend to happen. (There will be a next election in Spain, pending a unscheduled supernova.) So while I'd probably prefer "Proposed," this change will do. In the case of the latter category, almost all of its subcategories are also "Upcoming."--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 10:18, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''.  For the election ones, can we used scheduled?  I know that for places like the UK, scheduled will not mean a specific date until a few months before.  However as you said above, we know those will happen even if the date is uncertain right after the previous election. Upcoming also may not impart the fact that these may already be in progress.  In the US, the 2012 attack ads have already started.  Scheduled would also work for the space categories and should deal better with [[WP:CRYSTAL]] for all of this. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] ([[User talk:Vegaswikian|talk]]) 23:04, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
**"Scheduled" would make me very happy, since it doesn't predict the future. Are we okay with "Scheduled" for things like astronomical events, which will happen unless the universe explodes? If so, I'm behind all of the events becoming "Scheduled".--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 03:00, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
***'''Comment''' - "Scheduled" is fine for events that are, in fact, ''"Scheduled"'' - i.e. by human beings. But it would be pretty silly to refer to ''astronomical events'' as "Scheduled", don't you think?? [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 14:53, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
****Does indeed.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 17:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
****So are we saying that [[:Category:Future events]] can not be changed to [[:Category:Scheduled events]] or that we only need to  leave [[:Category:Upcoming astronomical events]] at that name? Or do we need to use [[:Category:Upcoming events]] for the parent? [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] ([[User talk:Vegaswikian|talk]]) 19:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
*****Actually, I think I'm changing my mind on "Scheduled astronomical events" (I created the "Upcoming astronomical events" category a few days ago, actually). They are scheduled, in that we humans keep track of things by schedules. We're writing about this from our perspective, and so if I want to know when the next eclipse is, I look at a schedule of eclipses. "Scheduled" works for me in all cases, so I'm behind that wording.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 02:38, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
******Mike, you've got me laughing so hard after reading this ingenious bit of sophistry that I can hardly type straight! If astronomical events can be "Scheduled", why, I suppose ''anything'' that can be marked on a calendar can be "Scheduled". I guess there really is no limitation on human agency - apparently even the very heavens are at our command! (Come to think of it, Christopher Columbus made excellent use of this very ability, impressing and terrifying the indigenous people he encountered with the power he had to make the Moon itself disappear at his command). [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 15:02, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
*******I am a world-class sophist. Some would say, a professional one.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 17:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
********In case that came across sounding kind of snarky, I assure you I was feeling thoroughly amused by the whole thing -- no offense intended. [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 00:03, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
*********I ''like'' snarky.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 00:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Rename''' all to [[:Category:Scheduled foo]] per the extensive discussion above. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] ([[User talk:Vegaswikian|talk]]) 00:08, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
**I've changed all but [[:Category:Future products]] to "Scheduled" instead of "Upcoming", including a slight wording change for the election candidates. [[:Category:Future products]]'s entire subcategory structure is based on "Upcoming (X)," and so it doesn't make sense in ''this'' nomination to change it to "Scheduled". It also probably doesn't belong in the events category. I suggest making that "Upcoming" to conform to its subcategories and then maybe nominate all of those later.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 04:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
***I have no issue with withdrawing those two.  Clearly a more focused discussion on those two areas would not hurt. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] ([[User talk:Vegaswikian|talk]]) 22:41, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
****Sorry, I must not have been clear. I'm not ''withdrawing'' [[:Category:Future products]], because it is out of character with its subcategories (they're all "Upcoming"). That part of this nomination I suggest keeping the same as I originally intended. Everything else can change to "Scheduled."--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 03:41, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Strong oppose all'''. This is a solution in desperate search for a problem. Plenty of things are definitely going to happen in  the future, but are not scheduled: e.g. the death of a monarch, or the world reaching 9 billion population. "Future" is a term which includes both scheduled and unscheduled events, and I see no benefit from narrowing the scope in this way. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#996600; cursor: not-allowed;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User_talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 17:36, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support'''.  While I understand BHGs concern, this change better reflects decisions here.  We routinely delete categories that are about future happenings when the date is not established.  This change makes it clear that categories should generally only be for happenings that can get a time established for them to happen in. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] ([[User talk:Vegaswikian|talk]]) 19:34, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''' revised nom. I think "scheduled" is much  better, at least for the subcategories listed above. I'm not sure about renaming {{cat|Future events}} if all the subcategories are not renamed, however. Call me "neutral" on that one. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 05:15, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:Fictional kiwi ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:''  '''keep.''' Per the Oppose votes, the fictional animals categories use common names for these animals, and allow for some assumption of interpretive ability on the reader's part. As to whether "(bird)" must be added, it is unlikely a reader would assume there were Wikipedia articles on fictional fuzzy brown-skinned fruits.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 07:50, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Fictional kiwi]] to [[:Category:Fictional Apteryx]] (or {{cat|Fictional kiwi (bird)}}, added at 03:52 15 June 2010 UTC)
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' '''Rename'''. In [[Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_June_5#Category:Apteryx|this recent discussion]], there was no consensus to rename {{cat|Apteryx}} to {{cat|Kiwi}}, so I propose renaming the subcategory of this category to match its parent, which is still {{cat|Apteryx}}. ("Apteryx" is a genus name so it is capitalized.) I still think it makes more sense to use "kiwi" in category names rather than "Apteryx", but these categories should at least be consistent since they are referring to exactly the same thing—one real, one fictional. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 10:11, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''', and if {{cl|Apteryx}} is nominated again for renaming, include this in such a nomination. [[User:Od Mishehu|עוד&nbsp;מישהו]] [[User talk:Od Mishehu|Od&nbsp;Mishehu]] 13:59, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''.  The last nomination of [[:Category:Apteryx]] could have gone to [[:Category:Kiwi (bird)]] rather then a keep.  The problem was the that there was opposition to just plain kiwi.  Maybe this should be modified to rename [[:Category:Fictional kiwi]] to [[:Category:Fictional kiwi (bird)]] and add rename [[:Category:Apteryx]] to [[:Category:Kiwi (bird)]].  I think this would have support except from the purists who want the category to always match the name of the main article.  [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] ([[User talk:Vegaswikian|talk]]) 21:01, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
**Hm, OK. I can go with that. I support the suggested '''rename to {{cat|Fictional kiwi (bird)}}''' and have adjusted the nomination accordingly. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 03:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' These are fictional characters '''not''' actual birds in the genus "Apteryx". Commons has the right idea with these sort of things (i.e. [[:Commons:Category:Sus]] and [[:Commons:Category:Pigs in art]], not [[:Commons:Category:Sus in art]]). -- [[User:Mattinbgn|Mattinbgn]]\<sup>[[User talk:Mattinbgn|talk]]</sup> 23:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
**I don't understand your comment. They are also not actual kiwi, so either option runs afoul (har har) of your criticism. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 03:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
***Is the principle really that hard to understand? They are representations of kiwi, of course but not members of the genus "Apteryx". "Apteryx" is a biological taxonomic form that is suitable for use with biological subjects but for use in other areas "Kiwi" is the better term.. We follow the same principle here at enwiki (although probably not for long once the CfD regulars get hold of the subject). See [[:Category:Equus]] for the biological uses and [[:Category:Horses]] for other uses. -- [[User:Mattinbgn|Mattinbgn]]\<sup>[[User talk:Mattinbgn|talk]]</sup> 05:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
****It's not difficult to understand what you mean when you write what you mean. What you wrote immediately above is not the same as what you wrote before. In any case, they are also fictional representations of the genus Apteryx, so the distinction you are drawing is as artificial as any other that can be made. Just because you agree with a specific approach doesn't make it the only possible "correct" one. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 05:04, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
*****''[[Apteryx haastii]]'' is a bird, [[Goodnight Kiwi]] is a cartoon character and thus '''not''' a bird nor a member of Genus Apteryx any more than me putting on a Big Bird costume makes me a bird. I am unsure how much clearer I can be. You don't have to agree with my rationale but to claim you don't understand my reasoning or that it is somehow "artificial" is perverse. -- [[User:Mattinbgn|Mattinbgn]]\<sup>[[User talk:Mattinbgn|talk]]</sup> 05:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
******I agree that it is not a bird of the Genus Apteryx, but it ''is'' a fictional bird of the Genus Apteryx as much as it is a fictional kiwi. I don't see any way around that except by constructing artificial (or if you prefer—"arbitrary") rules or barriers for how category names will be used. I don't understand how it's "perverse" to state that I don't understand a particular comment you made. If you want to be understood, just be more clear, as you were with your second comment. You seem to be conflating not understanding (my reaction to your first comment) with disagreeing with an approach (my reaction to your second comment). They are not the same thing, and trying to be clearer will always help with the first, but only occasionally with the second. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 05:48, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''' [[:Category:Fictional kiwi (birds)]], since "Kiwi" is ambiguous, and categories should not be ambiguous. [[Special:Contributions/70.29.212.131|70.29.212.131]] ([[User talk:70.29.212.131|talk]]) 05:15, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' as per the very clear and straightforward view of mattinbgn.  The fictional characters are not members of any genus.  This change makes it more confusing for most people who know what a kiwi is, but wouldn't have a clue what a Apteryx is (ie 99% of the world). [[User:The-Pope|The-Pope]] ([[User talk:The-Pope|talk]]) 15:05, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
**The proposal and the weight of the consensus has moved to on to considering {{cat|Fictional kiwi (bird)}}, so you may want to comment on that proposal. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 22:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Future things ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:'' '''Rename all'''. [[User:Od Mishehu|עוד&nbsp;מישהו]] [[User talk:Od Mishehu|Od&nbsp;Mishehu]] 16:55, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future military equipment]] to [[:Category:Proposed military equipment]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future weapons]] to [[:Category:Proposed weapons]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future American weapons]] to [[:Category:Proposed American weapons]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future sports venues]]  to [[:Category:Proposed sports venues]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future television channels and networks]] to [[:Category:Proposed television channels and networks]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Future radio stations and programming]] to [[:Category:Proposed radio stations]]
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' '''Rename'''. Suggesting de-futurizing this along the lines of [[Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 May 31#Future infrastructure|this recent series of nominations]]. In the latter category, these are all radio stations; there appears to be no programming here.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 09:52, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Category:Seljuk Sultanate of Rûm and Turkish beyliks ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:''  '''delete as obsolete'''. This category is empty and has been listed for deletion for that reason. The name is also unnecessarily confusing as noted below. We have [[:Category:Sultanate of Rûm]] and [[:Category:Anatolian beyliks]] for articles that want to go in here.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 08:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Seljuk Sultanate of Rûm and Turkish beyliks]] to [[:Category:Anatolian Seljuk Sultanate and Turkish Beyliks]]
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' '''Rename'''. The term "Sultanate of Rum" is as pertinent in our day as the term [[Indian Territories]] is for the [[American Midwest]]. Furthermore, the name for the category has a faulty logic in ascribing the term "Seljuk" to both the sultanate and the principalities ([[Beyliks]]). Each had dynasties from different backgrounds, Beyliks were dependent on or independent from the Sultanate in varying degrees in each case and each evolving in time. What these had in common was that all, [[Anatolian Seljuk Sultanate|Seljuk Sultanate]] and [[Anatolian Turkish Beyliks|Turkish Beyliks]], were located in "[[Anatolia]]". There were other Seljuk sultanates and other Turkish Beyliks elsewhere. [[User:Cretanforever|Cretanforever]] ([[User talk:Cretanforever|talk]]) 08:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
::'''Oppose''' move on the two grounds: 1) "Sultanate of Rum" is by no means obsolete nomenclature. Turkish nationalists, for whatever reason, are uncomfortable with the term [[Rûm]]. Turkish historical pedagogy has followed the nationalists in this regard so that Turkish textbooks almost invariably now refer to the people as ''Anadolu Selçukları'' or "Anatolian Seljuks". On the other hand, English and other Western European scholarship refers to them as the ''Seljuks'' or ''Seljuqs of Rum''. I have seen recently published bilingual books on the subject where the Turkish text reads ''Anadolu Selçukları'' and the English reads ''Seljuqs of Rum'' (ref. upon request). According to [[WP:UE]], we need to use the commonly accepted English language name which in this case certainly includes the word ''Rûm''. Added to this is the fact that the Seljuqs themselves were not ashamed to call the land they ruled ''Rûm''.    

::2) In the name of this category, the adjective "Seljuk" clearly does not modify "Turkish Beyliks". <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Aramgar|Aramgar]] ([[User talk:Aramgar|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Aramgar|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

::'''Oppose''', I see no viable reason for the change. When placed in quotations "Anatolian Seljuk Sultanate" gets 17 hits on google books[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=%22Anatolian+Seljuk+Sultanate%22&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=], whereas "Seljuk Sultanate of Rum" gets 737 hits[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=%22Seljuk+Sultanate+of+Rum%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=]. So the ''theory'' of '''faulty logic''' is in itself a fallacy. In a side note, I've noticed an increase in removal(and change) of categories by nationalistic ''editors''. Clearly this is an attempt to removed information found unpalatable and in most cases, to reflect the policies and agenda of a nationalistic Turkish POV. --[[User:Kansas Bear|Kansas Bear]] ([[User talk:Kansas Bear|talk]]) 02:21, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

====Category:Filmed suicides in the September 11 attacks====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:'' '''Delete'''. [[User:Od Mishehu|עוד&nbsp;מישהו]] [[User talk:Od Mishehu|Od&nbsp;Mishehu]] 19:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
{{lc|Filmed suicides in the September 11 attacks}}
*'''Delete''' - This is a fine example of wildly excessive categorization. Somehow, I briefly thought perhaps there might be a film or two about some of the people who leaped to their deaths from the top floors of the World Trade Center. Not hardly. None of the articles are even about ''films'' that deal with the indicated subject. What's more, none of the articles actually show the individuals in question committing suicide, because they are, in fact, none other than ''the hijackers of the airliners'' -- '''all of whom are already covered by the parent''' {{cat|Participants in the September 11 attacks}}. Sheesh... have I missed anything? <code>Notified creator with <nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:cfd-notify|subst:cfd-notify]]}}</code> [[User:Cgingold|Cgingold]] ([[User talk:Cgingold|talk]]) 06:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. Holy crap. No offence to the creator, but this is kind of inane. These are hardly "filmed suicides", since the individuals committing suicide cannot be seen on the film. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 10:13, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Based on the contents of the category, this is far better covered in {{cat|Participants in the September 11 attacks}} and the title of this category under discussion would lead many to believe it was about victims of the crashes, not perpetrators. [[User:Alansohn|Alansohn]] ([[User talk:Alansohn|talk]]) 13:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', title is misleading if category contents are as described. [[User:Daniel Case|Daniel Case]] ([[User talk:Daniel Case|talk]]) 18:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>

==== Proposed infrastructure ====
<div class="boilerplate vfd" style="background:#bff9fc; margin:0 auto; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''

:''The result of the discussion was:'' '''Rename all'''. [[User:Od Mishehu|עוד&nbsp;מישהו]] [[User talk:Od Mishehu|Od&nbsp;Mishehu]] 12:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
{{Collapse top|Planned infrastructure}}
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned infrastructure]]  to [[:Category:Proposed infrastructure]]
:'''Propose merging''' [[:Category:Planned or proposed bridges]]  to [[:Category:Proposed bridges]]
:'''Propose merging''' [[:Category:Planned or proposed Buildings]]  to [[:Category:Proposed buildings and structures]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned or proposed canals]]  to [[:Category:Proposed canals]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned or proposed energy projects]]  to [[:Category:Proposed energy projects]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned or proposed indoor arenas]]  to [[:Category:Proposed indoor arenas]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned or proposed stadiums]]  to [[:Category:Proposed stadiums]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned or proposed stadiums in the United States]]  to [[:Category:Proposed stadiums in the United States]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned or proposed tunnels]]  to [[:Category:Proposed tunnels]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned coal-fired power stations in the United States]]  to [[:Category:Proposed coal-fired power stations in the United States]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned museums]]  to [[:Category:Proposed museums]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned museums in Canada]]  to [[:Category:Proposed museums in Canada]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned museums in the United States]]  to [[:Category:Proposed museums in the United States]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned skyscrapers in Israel]]  to [[:Category:Proposed skyscrapers in Israel]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Nuclear power stations with planned reactors]]  to [[:Category:Nuclear power stations with proposed reactors]]
{{Collapse bottom}}
{{Collapse top|Planned airlines}}
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Australia]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Australia]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Gabon]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Gabon]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Germany]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Germany]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Greece]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Greece]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Guyana]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Guyana]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Haiti]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Haiti]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of India]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of India]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Iraq]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Iraq]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Italy]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Italy]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Macau]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Macau]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Russia]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Russia]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Serbia]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Serbia]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of South Korea]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of South Korea]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Sri Lanka]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Sri Lanka]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Syria]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Syria]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Thailand]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Thailand]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of the Czech Republic]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of the Czech Republic]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of the Democratic Republic of the Congo]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of the Democratic Republic of the Congo]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of the Dominican Republic]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of the Dominican Republic]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of the People's Republic of China]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of the People's Republic of China]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of the Philippines]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of the Philippines]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of the United Arab Emirates]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of the United Arab Emirates]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of the United Kingdom]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of the United Kingdom]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of the United States]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of the United States]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Tunisia]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Tunisia]]
:'''Propose renaming''' [[:Category:Planned airlines of Vietnam]] to [[:Category:Proposed airlines of Vietnam]]
{{collapse bottom}}
:'''Nominator's rationale:''' '''Rename'''. Now that we've [[Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_May 31#Future infrastructure|decided]] to use "Proposed" for all unfinished infrastructure categories, here are a few that need to be standardized, including the recently renamed parent category. I left out all "Planned cities," "Planned developments," and "Planned communities" variants until I can determine which of them mean "Not yet built" and which mean "[[New town]]".--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 00:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Support''' in principle.  The omissions were wise ones: "Planned" for communities can mean that they were developed according to a master plan, rather than having grown organically.  For example Washington DC is (I understand) planned, whereas London is certainly not.  [[User:Peterkingiron|Peterkingiron]] ([[User talk:Peterkingiron|talk]]) 19:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
**Yeah, I'm not nominating any more of the "Planned" ones, because they all are of the [[:Category:Planned cities]] variety, as far as I can tell. I've given all of those a header which explains where to look for places that are simply not yet constructed.--[[User:Mike Selinker|Mike Selinker]] ([[User talk:Mike Selinker|talk]]) 03:44, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
----
:''The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.  <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 [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this section.''</div>