Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 April 19

< April 18	April 20 >

April 19

Category:Cities with building height restrictions

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 10:33, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Single entry category with no parent. Don't all ciies have some kind of a limit? Vegaswikian (talk) 22:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's only few cities that won't let their buildings be too tall. Or is there more? Ryanbstevens (talk) 22:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you name a city that does not have a limit (include citation)? Vegaswikian (talk) 02:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be too common to be defining. See Height restriction laws. --24.13.246.116 (talk) 23:38, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's like listing almost every city in the world. Few cities have height limits, which is what this category is for. DEFINING! Ryanbstevens (talk) 23:17, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – not defining. A few paras on a city are not going to include any planning details. Occuli (talk) 13:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Pretty much every city, not definable enough QueenCake (talk) 19:27, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete doesn't define the city. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete —what would be interesting are cities without such a limit. This category is like having Category:Cities with a sewer system. Arsenikk ^(talk) 14:59, 22 April 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.

Category:Singles that were re-recorded and released

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 10:32, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Not a defining criterion. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 21:49, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. --Richhoncho (talk) 22:13, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really going to complain about this, but i don't think that this happens to too many singles, or does it? Ryanbstevens (talk) 22:14, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not in country music at least. In pop music it's not uncommon. Even so, it's not really a defining criterion, no more defining than the fact that it came from a compilation album, didn't chart at all, was released on the first Tuesday in Lent, etc. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 23:30, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sounds a relatively common phenomenon. Is that not what a cover version is? Peterkingiron (talk) 00:42, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete songs are covered to regularly to make this a meaningful aid to navigation. Alansohn (talk) 04:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – to judge from A Woman's Love, the title should be something like Category:Singles that were re-recorded by the same artist and released again but this is getting too complicated (and not 'defining'). Occuli (talk) 13:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not defining. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:13, 20 April 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.

Category:Songs written by Eddie Cooley

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 10:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's rationale: Delete. Another bunch of categories with only one entry and no corresponding article. Again, any help by adding songs, or creating the article will be much appreciated.

Category:Songs with lyrics by John DeVries

Category:Songs with music by Leo J. De John

Category:Songs with music by Antonio DeVita

Category:Songs with lyrics by Dux De John

Category:Songs with lyrics by Julie De John

Category:Songs written by Allan Jeffrey

Category:Songs with lyrics by Bernard Dougall

Category:Songs with lyrics by James Dyrenforth

Category:Songs with music by Michael Edwards

Richhoncho (talk) 19:43, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support but there is The De John Sisters. Occuli (talk) 00:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Any problems if I amend the song in the De John cats to The De John Sisters? --Richhoncho (talk) 15:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all except the DeJohn ones, which can be moved to Category:Songs written by The De John Sisters. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 19:09, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move completed as suggested. the De John cats are all now empty. --Richhoncho (talk) 20:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:14, 20 April 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.

Category:Drugs on the University of Cambridge MVST 1B Drugs List

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: Speedily deleted per author request. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Drugs on the University of Cambridge MVST 1B Drugs List - Sorry, I started creating this before I realised I probably ought to check whether it is a suitable category. When complete it should contain all 271 of the pharmacological drugs which are require learning for the medical students at The University of Cambridge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SuperTycoon (talk • contribs) 19:18, 19 April 2009
- Delete. Relevant to participants of one university course only http://www.phar.cam.ac.uk/teaching/tea_mvst1b_moda.html JFW | T@lk 18:32, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – just suppose every medical school had its own such category. Each drug would be in about 1000 categories. Occuli (talk) 20:25, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I want to thank SuperTycoon for having the wisdom to bring this to CFD. This can be Speedy Deleted very easily by placing {{db-author}} on the Category page. Cgingold (talk) 20:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as the category adds nothing to aid navigation for readers of Wikipedia. Alansohn (talk) 03:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per author request. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:53, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:14, 20 April 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.