Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 May 2

< May 1	May 3 >

May 2

Category:Skyscrapers

Propose deleting Category:Skyscrapers over 350 meters - Template:Lc1

Category:Skyscrapers between 300 and 349 meters - Template:Lc1

Category:Skyscrapers between 250 and 299 meters - Template:Lc1

Category:Skyscrapers between 200 and 249 meters - Template:Lc1

Category:Skyscrapers between 150 and 199 meters - Template:Lc1

Category:Skyscrapers between 100 and 149 meters - Template:Lc1

Category:Skyscrapers between 50 and 99 meters - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Per Wikipedia:ARBITRARYCAT. Categorizing buildings by their height is arbitrary and does not help navigation. TM 12:02, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – categorising skyscrapers by height seems the most obvious way of categorising them; the height is the essence. A cfd in 2007 reached the same conclusion. (The nominator should bundle these noms together, as was done in 2007.) Oculi (talk) 09:44, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Noted and completed merge.--TM 12:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support, per nom as arbitrary, and it's better to have skyscrapers in a sortable table with exact height (as alreadg mentioned in previous discussion), and (in contrast to what's mentioned in the previous discussion) deletion of these categories would not lead to one huge skyscrapers category since they're also diffused by country and city. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:25, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

comment IF these are to be deleted, first it must be assured that all the articles are in other skyscraper categories. Currently, some articles on skyscrapers are only in one of these height categories. Hmains (talk) 17:11, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Starfleet counselors

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: double merge (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:29, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Starfleet counselors - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Clearly this can have only two entries in the foreseeable future. We are unlikely to need it for the next few decades, at least... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:20, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would merging to Category:Starfleet officers make sense?--TM 12:05, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Boldly delete where no one has deleted before. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:59, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge to parent category Category:Starfleet officers. No reason to leave the articles uncategorized. Dimadick (talk) 07:50, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge I normally argue for argue "one franchise: one category", but that would be going too far in this case. Nevertheless, we should not allow fragmentation of fictional franchise categories. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:46, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Double merge, also to the other parent Category:Fictional psychologists. – Fayenatic London 21:44, 8 May 2017 (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.