Shrug. I don't really care what you call it. Please note that the subcategories are intended to hold files and templates though. So, calling it a "Wikipedia" category isn't really correct. In a few days Category:License migration candidates will be among the largest categories on Wikipedia, since it will be initiated with nearly all GFDL images. Dragons flight (talk) 00:30, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support rename -- a license category could conceivably be about main namespace articles (such as, license). The false assertion by Debresser is not supported by evidence on the record. At most recent count, there are currently 208 categories with prefix "Wikipedia:" (colon) and 5,601 categories with prefix "Wikipedia " (space). --William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Google cache has 63 films in this category. Can we have a rationale for its deletion and an explanation for its emptying? (The creator of the category placed a few films in it and these edits were reverted as 'vandalism' - how is it vandalism to create and populate a category?) Occuli (talk) 15:32, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reply I have no idea who deleted those films, they must have been deleted on a film by film basis by editors who may have disagreed with the tagging of the films as "Gun Fu". I have no problem with it as such, it just needs to be populated or deleted, not stand there empty. magnius (talk) 15:36, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I now see from User talk:Lg16spears that there is a history of creating short-lived small categories. However 63 is not small. I have no idea whether there are 'Gun fu' films but a search on Gun fu reveals several and the article mentions others. Occuli (talk) 15:42, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment How is this well-defined? Serenity (film) just got so tagged, and there's little to no martial arts culture involved--just a fight scene that involves kicking people in the head. Jclemens (talk) 20:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then maybe it shouldn't be in the category, like so many articles in so many categories, however well defined. I note from the article that "Stunt coordinator Chad Stahelski, a student of Jeet Kune Do under Dan Inosanto, created a customised fighting style for Summer Glau to use in the film's fight scenes. It was a hybrid of Kung Fu, kickboxing and elements of ballet, all combined to create a "balletic" martial art." - but that doesn't seem to really meet the gun fu definition - no guns for a start. Johnbod (talk) 21:54, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have no view yet on the validity of the category itself, however LGSpears IP socks have been repeatedly adding films and other categories to this category which are clearly NOT "Gun Fu" films, seemingly randomly choosing based on his own view of what they should be. Due to the continuing issues here, all of those IPs edits are reverted as vandalism on sight. If valid editors want to populate the category with actual "gun fu" films based on reliable sources, not just LGSpears rather off-beat ideas, I see no issue there. -- Collectonian (talk·contribs) 00:42, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have just blocked an IP for re-populating this category with articles that do not fit the category scope and have rolled back all of the IP's edits. Best, Mifter (talk) 19:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Category:2010s automobiles
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:Keep. Nothing has changed since the last discussion was closed as a keep. Even if that discussion was not had this could easly be closed as WP:SNOW. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:11, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Merge per nom. However, I'd point out that this really could have gone to cfr-speedy instead; it doesn't require any actual debate. Bearcat (talk) 22:01, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rename - both because it contains only lists and to discourage individual character articles from being added, contrary to current consensus. Otto4711 (talk) 23:47, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is nothing to populate the category with until we're actually in the 2010s. As with episode counts, we don't update these sort of stats until they actually occur. (There are too many variables in broadcasting that can lead to delays or cancellations.) --Ckatzchatspy04:03, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - or rename per Explicit. Relax, be patient, we'll be there soon and if not Wikipedia will be a minor problem. There will be many series already scheduled to debut in 2010; this is a fact, not crystal ballery. There are also plenty of similar 2010s categories, including Category:2010s automobiles which was recently kept at cfd. Occuli (talk) 14:36, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't feel the category should necessarily be deleted, as it obviously will be in use in just over six months. I'll state again, however, that we cannot populate the category until a series has actually aired post-January 1, 2010. This is in keeping with how we update "total episode" counts, which are not incremented until a new episode actually airs. (Just as a series may order a certain number of episodes in a given season, but end up airing less, a series that is scheduled to air in 2010 can easily be cancelled or delayed.) --Ckatzchatspy05:37, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree on this point; this category came to my attention because its creator was tagging series into it seemingly based on his own impression of whether an existing series would be airing in 2010, rather than pickup announcements, etc. This category is related to but different than Category:2010 television series debuts, which is populated as debuts are announced. Is it nitpicking to note that pretty much any series can be cancelled at any time? It is tempting to assume that any continuing series set to return this fall and/or contracted for multiple seasons will continue through 2010, but is this the kind of determination we want to make in June? I suppose this issue will only arise every decade, but if this CfD has increased awareness then it's served a purpose.— TAnthonyTalk19:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
