Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/User

Template:Cfdu-header

Speedy nominations

New nominations by date

June 30

Category:Wikipedians with iPhones

Category:Wikipedians with iPhones - Template:Lc1

Nominator's rationale: Phenomenally a vanity category, somewhat élitist and utterly useless to the project. Sorry! Alison ☺ 02:02, 1 July 2007 (UTC) (and I know my iPhones)[reply]

• Close and take it to WP:UCFD. Otto4711 02:52, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Moved here as suggested above. --Bduke 10:13, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians_by_alma_mater

WP:NOT#MYSPACE, serves no collaborative purpose. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 11:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:21, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, it is actually to store all of the alma mater categories into one main family. - Presidentman 11:20, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Serves as a parent category to hundreds/thousands of useful categories. These are incredibly useful for collaboration on school and university articles and I myself have used them in the past for collaboration. --- RockMFR 18:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Serves as basic information about a user, allowing collaboration on an obvious subject.--Mike Selinker 01:41, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep per JDG and RockMFR. JRG 03:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep per all of the above. It quite clearly does provide a basis for collaboration. --Bduke 09:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

0-level categories

Category:Wikipedians who like manga & Category:Wikipedians who like anime

WP:MYSPACE No collaborative purpose. Baring that, merge into Category:Wikipedians interested in anime and manga. -- Jelly Soup 01:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per your alternate suggestion. Bladestorm 02:45, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge. bibliomaniac15 ^{BUY NOW!} 03:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge - interested in, yes. Ambiguous "like", notso much. --Haemo 08:17, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge, as per nom. Horologium t-c 20:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm not quite sure why we should merge Wikipedians who have simply stated in a userbox that they watch/read anime/manga into the category for Wikipedians that collaborate on these articles, when they have added themselves by their own choice. When someone goes searching for help in a user category, it would be useful if they actually found someone who works in the articles, and these people are not necessarily that. This would dilute Category:Wikipedians interested in anime and manga's usefulness. Better to delete outright and allow the original members to add themselves to the "interested" category of their own accord. Dmcdevit·t 01:30, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem that a large majority of users under "interested" are also under the other two categories. That mixed with Dmcdevit's comments leads me to believe that deletion would be the best option. -- Jelly Soup 01:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

June 29

Category:Wikipedians Who Have Amd Sempron

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete right on this one. Too narrow. DGG 19:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I think this is pretty much unambiguous. --Haemo 08:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who visit U.S. States

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. under the same rationale used to delete Category:Wikipedians who visit countries. Same idea, smaller scale. Horologium t-c 15:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per the next above. --Haemo 08:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this would nearly include all American Wikipedians by default, as Americans can visit a different state anytime they go on the interstate or U.S. Highway system. - Presidentman 11:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who think the many worlds interpretation is true

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. not useful for collaboration, only two members in group (and three userbox pages). Horologium t-c 15:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete Might be useful if better populated, since it is relevant to editing. DGG 19:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the category "Wikipedian qualified to have a useful opinion on the subject" is probably about as populated as this one; and I doubt there's any overlap. --Haemo 08:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who survived Philmont

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, although this has more users than the following cat, it's still not something that is useful for collaboration. The userbox is adequate to note the experience. Horologium t-c 15:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Since there are quite a few articles in Category:Philmont Scout Ranch, this category presumably is a basis for collaboration. --Bduke 09:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. per JDG and Bduke.Rlevse 12:02, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who survived ROCS

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not useful, only one person in group. Horologium t-c 15:56, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This one, unlike Category:Wikipedians who survived Philmont is not a basis for collaboration, and is redundant with that category. --Bduke 09:44, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who summarize

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this is a group to which everyone should belong. Non-collaborative and can be expressed solely through the userbox. Horologium t-c 16:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Everyone should leave an edit summary. --_Hdt83 ^Chat 23:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Hdt83. --Haemo 08:20, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who remember the Canadian soldiers

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Nice sentiment, but not useful for collaboration and can be expressed through a userbox. Horologium t-c 16:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I do, but I don't think a category helps me with this, or writing an encyclopedia. --Haemo 08:21, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians by Bible translation preference: English Standard Version

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Potentially divisive, non-collaborative, can be expressed through the userbox. Horologium t-c 16:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and above.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - per JDG. And how anyone could suggest this is divisive is beyond me. Let's leave this as is. JRG 03:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians Who Use Lifehacker

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who have visited all of the U.S. States

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is a userbox category. No collaboration potential. Horologium t-c 16:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- JDG took the words out of my mouth on this one. --It's-is-not-a-genitive 11:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who visit National Parks

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete under the same rationale used to delete Category:Wikipedians who visit countries. Same concept, smaller scale. Horologium t-c 16:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who believe True Love Waits

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment This is a subcat in Category:Wikipedians by religion. It should already be marked for deletion. Horologium t-c 16:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who decline to state a party affiliation

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This is a "not" category, and it's not useful as a consequence. Horologium t-c 16:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who do Bookcrossing

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who hike in Grand Canyon

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 14:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Dmcdevit is right about a lack of collaborative purposes. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. no potential for collaboration; can be expressed through a userbox. Horologium t-c 16:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete/Merge into parent - Only one member, the cat's creator, and it's been that way for months. Would have some potential if it actually had some members.

June 28

Category:Heterosexual Wikipedians

WP:MYSPACE. This is completely unhelpful and indiscriminate, like the handedness and gender categories which were previously deleted. No potential for collaboration. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - On the order of 97% of all humans fall into this category. Being heterosexual serves no conceivable collaborative purpose. --Haemo 00:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I think 90-95% is more accurate, but the principle still stands. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 00:35, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, but I'd like to note that a serious storm will be kicked up if the opposing categories are nominated, especially since there is already a WikiProject in place. Deleting this cat is likely to instigate a rather WP:POINTish nomination of the LGBT cats. It's not going to be from me, but almost certainly somebody will do so, using this as precedent. Just something for participants in this discussion to consider. Horologium t-c 01:56, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't understand the problem. Categorizing based on homosexuality is no more useful for collaboration than heterosexuality. I don't think it would be disruptive to nominate them. Dmcdevit·t 03:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, I more-or-less agree with you, insofar as there is a (very large, active and well-run) WikiProject in place. However, I think that suggesting deletion of those cats is going to encounter opposition. There is a good deal of duplication, overlap and interlinking in that subcat (which should be addressed, and really shouldn't be that controversial) but unlike the Hetero cat, which is useless for collaboration, many of the various LGBT cats can be useful. There are a lot of LGBT sub-cultures that don't have much in common except for their sexual orientation, and a Lipstick lesbian is most likely not going to be able to contribute much to a discussion about the Bear Community (to choose two wildly divergent and currently extant subcats). Horologium t-c 03:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This is impossible. Anybody who's not in this category is considered automatically gay or bi! This doesn't work one bit.--WaltCip 04:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No way this could be used to build the encyclopedia. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 23:44, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This will leave a gap in the parent Category:Wikipedians by sexuality meaning someone will come along and re-create this category again just to rebalance the parent cat. Perhaps Wikipedians by sexuality should also be deleted or renamed? —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 09:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Would contain the majority of all users by default, so it is not useful. VegaDark (talk) 04:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Who are you people to restrict terms Wikipedians choose to define themselves with? The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. I am for almost pure "libertarianism" on all non-encyc pages, and for strict quality control of encyc. pages. You folks are mixing up the two and are trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nobody here is restrict terms with which Wikipedians choose to define themselves. Categories are not about self-definition; they are about grouping pages. Anyone is free to define oneself as they choose on the text of their user page. Dmcdevit·t 23:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Kinky Wikipedians

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• At the very least re-name to "Wikipedians interested in BDSM". --Haemo 00:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or Rename per Haemo. -- Jelly Soup 00:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or rename per Haemo. It may be interesting to know that someone is kinky, but not particularly relevant to encyclopedic collaboration. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 01:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The rename is not a good idea; not all kinky sex is BDSM-related. If there is enough support, someone can create a WikiProject for "Alternative Sexuality" or something along those lines. Horologium t-c 02:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who wish not to be male

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep: Many members of the Wiki-community are Trans and do not want to be Male. This people find it painful. --Brianna Goldberg 20:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Category:Transsexual Wikipedians is the larger, more appropriate group. Nobody has proposed deleting that group. Horologium t-c 02:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Per nom. Wikipedia isn't a support group. --Kbdank71 20:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete as a "wish" category. People wish to have, be, or not be many things, but none of them are relevant to building an encyclopedia. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 01:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. bibliomaniac15 ^{BUY NOW!} 01:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per Black Falcon.Horologium t-c 02:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Creates precedent for any other "wish" category. VegaDark (talk) 04:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Oh, darn, this quest to rid Wikipedia of any inter-affiliation is so tiresome. There are plenty of people with gender dysphoria who would not consider themselves transsexuals, for a multitude of reasons. Some people also use this tag alongside 'wishes not to be female', because they affiliate themselves with neither gender. If the nominators are so concerned about 'wishing,' perhaps the category could be renamed to Wikipedians with gender dysphoria. --It's-is-not-a-genitive 11:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Windows Live Mail

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep As it is a very popular e-mail service. - Presidentman 11:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Its simpler in this case for editors to collaborate via the single relevant article's talk page rather than via a category.—Elipongo (Talk contribs) 06:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use KDE

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep No reason to delete popular software categories. - Presidentman 11:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Adobe software

And subcategories: Category:Wikipedians who use Adobe Flash, Category:Wikipedians who use Adobe Illustrator, Category:Wikipedians who use Adobe InDesign, Category:Wikipedians who use Adobe Photoshop

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep. The Photoshop category is one of the most useful collaborative categories we have. These users have experience using Photoshop and can be extremely helpful when dealing with images. --- RockMFR 16:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - per RockMFR. If I had to get an image fixed beyond what I was capable of, this cat would be where I looked. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 23:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I have to agree with RockMFR on this one. This is an example of a category that can be used to further the encyclopedia. Horologium t-c 23:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep per RockMFR. - Presidentman 11:26, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use SpamCop

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural question: any reason why this category is named three times?--Ramdrake 12:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing other than my error. Thank you for cleaning it up for me. Dmcdevit·t 16:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who play EVE Online

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who play Kingdom of Loathing

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who play Lineage 2

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who play Sega Genesis/Mega Drive games

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This helps with collaboration on our many Sega Genesis articles. Yes, we have broad WikiProjects, but their member categories aren't very helpful when it comes to specific systems. --- RockMFR 16:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Rate Your Music

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who listen to 78 RPM records

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - It may indeed be useful to be able to find people who have the equipment to play 78 RPM records. Back in the days when I still had a turntable, it didn't even have a 78 RPM setting and I couldn't even play those old records at a slow setting because the stylus just skittered out of the groove. Those records would play just fine on my dad's antique windup Victrola, though. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 23:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Useful how? Just because the equipment is rare does not make the owners any more likely to collaborate on something. Dmcdevit·t 23:31, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Lots of people have unplayable 78s in their attics, a lot of it may very well be out of copyright by now and could certainly help fill up the dearth of material over at Wikipedia:Featured sounds and on Commons. Being able to find other Wikipedians who can play and digitize those sounds can be of great use to the project. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 02:38, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Sputnikmusic

WP:MYSPACE. This serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 11:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

June 27

Category:Hanuman Devotee

Rename to Category:Wikipedian Hanuman devotees, or just delete. -- Prove It ^(talk) 13:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I, the creator of the category, give full Support to rename this category.

ARUNKUMAR P.R 08:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per the deletion of Category:Wikipedians by religion. Being a member of a religion does not endow one with the ability to contribute encyclopedic content about that religion. Also, religious categories are potentially divisive. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 01:17, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename perhaps to Wikipedians interested in Hanuman. It still may be a little specific but I hoping to find more people to collaborate on Hanuman-related (ie. The Hindu epic Ramayana related) articles. Gizza^{Discuss ©} 04:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who are zombies

This one is a no-brainer (pun intended). Joke categories are not helpful to Wikipedia. VegaDark (talk) 08:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete non-sense category, which has no redeeming value whatsoever. --Haemo 09:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete. bibliomaniac15 ^{BUY NOW!} 21:32, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete. -- Jelly Soup 00:28, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedu Delete. Nonsense category; another example of userbox creation spilling over into cats. Horologium t-c 02:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• BRAINS!!!! per nom.--WaltCip 18:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• SPEEDY DEATH Death to the zombies! Wait, aren't they undead? I'm confused, anyway speedy delete. Nonsense. --_Hdt83 ^Chat 23:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - A make-believe categorization can't help build the encyclopedia. It should also be noted that this category is an orphan, it's recursively listed as its own parent. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 06:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Users of The Bat!

Wrong naming convention, not to mention useless. VegaDark (talk) 08:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete using an email client is very general, and does not imply any level of expertise in subject matter. No collaborative merit. --Haemo 09:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Second that. Delete.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Another category with only one user. Not useful for collaboration. Horologium t-c 23:35, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

June 26

Category:Wikipedians with the knack

WP:MYSPACE. This has no collaborative pottential. Dmcdevit·t 19:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 22:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 03:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - it's a Dilbert joke, not a collaborative purpose. --Haemo 05:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Imperial measurements

WP:MYSPACE. This has no collaborative pottential. Dmcdevit·t 19:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as I stated below. —MJCdetroit 20:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - serves no collaborative purpose. It's a broad, general, attribute with no clear expertise involved. The fact that it might make Wikipedia more "fun" is not a reason to keep it. --Haemo 05:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Until the U.S.A. undergoes full metrication this category will be too broad. When the day comes that it is rare to find people who know that a pint's a Pound the world round, we can revive it. (Oh wait, that's United States customary units, but you get the point anyway) —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 23:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Meaning of Life Wikipedians

WP:MYSPACE. This has no collaborative pottential. Dmcdevit·t 19:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. And everyone knows that the real meaning of life is 42. MER-C 09:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who keep Halal

WP:MYSPACE. This has no collaborative pottential. Dmcdevit·t 19:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - literally billions of people do this. It's too general to ever serve a collaborative purpose. --Haemo 05:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - See my comment below for Wikipedians who keep kosher but fill in Halal related articles instead. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 22:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who keep kosher

WP:MYSPACE. This has no collaborative pottential. Dmcdevit·t 19:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Category:Wikipedians who keep Kosher added to this nom (note caps). --- RockMFR 22:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - see my comment on Halal. --Haemo 05:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep & merge - There shouldn't be two categories, but there is plenty of collaborative potential for articles such as Kosher foods, Kashrut, Hechsher, Kosher tax, Mashgiach, Kosher wine, Cholov Yisroel, Glatt, etc. ad nauseam. Kashrut can be a complicated and confusing subject and being able to find others who know and keep those laws can aid greatly in improving the many articles that relate to the subject. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 22:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Using a userbox that announces adherence to a set of dietary rules is not the same as contributing to the articles, or even being knowledgeable in the topic. If I were looking for collaborators, I'd go to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish culture. Dmcdevit·t 01:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Unless they changed the relevant userboxen since last I looked (admittedly a while back) this category isn't included in them. I had to specifically add it to my user cats on the bottom of my user page. As to making an inquiry at WP:JEWC, you may not realize this but many (and if I may be so bold as to say, most) Jews don't keep Kosher at all. Many who do only do so to a limited extent. Those who have a good working knowledge of Kashrut aren't as common as it may seem at first; especially if you yourself live in one of those cities where there happen to be many observant Jews. Frankly this user category is indeed the fastest and easiest way for Kashrut knowledgeable people to find each other for collaboration or for someone to find us to pose a query. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 05:54, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I was wrong about the userbox, Template:User kosher includes it. My mistake. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 08:58, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and merge per Elipongo. bibliomaniac15 ^{BUY NOW!} 01:23, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Dmcdevit. -- Jelly Soup 01:30, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. ——Elipongo (Talk contribs) 06:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep & merge I came to vote delete, but was convinced by Elipongo's reasoning. Kashrut can be an opaque and confusing system, and I very much expect that people who practice it know substantially more than others about its various intricacies. This is useful for collaboration. nadav (talk) 09:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep & Merge, per Elipongo. --It's-is-not-a-genitive 11:44, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who want to Save Jeeves

WP:MYSPACE. This has no redeeming value. Dmcdevit·t 09:34, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Riana (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 03:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. No collaborative potential; can be expressed via userbox. Horologium t-c 22:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I don't see how this category could be used to build the encyclopedia; besides Jeeves is already beyond saving.—Elipongo (Talk contribs) 23:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Tim Q. Wells 06:51, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who want to live in Istanbul

WP:MYSPACE. This has no redeeming value. Dmcdevit·t 09:34, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Riana (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. VegaDark (talk) 03:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete "wanting" to live somewhere cannot help anyone, ever, improve the encyclopedia. --Haemo 05:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per nom and Haemo. Horologium t-c 22:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mixed-handed Wikipedians

WP:MYSPACE. As with Category:Left-handed Wikipedians and Category:Right-handed Wikipedians, this has no redeeming value. Dmcdevit·t 09:34, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep -- None of these types of categories has any particular value to Wikipedia, but they do have value to Wikipedians. The erosion of all these encyclopedially-irrelevant, yet socially-interesting categories is taking some of the fun out of being a Wikipedian, and may result in a gradual exodus of valuable editors. I cannot offer any reason why this category in particular is more important to keep than others of a similar ilk, but I give this "vote" on the basis that I am opposed to the removal of such categories in general, and I'm a mixed-handed Wikipedian! -- Scjessey 13:17, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are conflating the category with the user page. No one is limiting your self expression, but you don't need a category for that. Dmcdevit·t 19:00, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no collaborative merit to this category. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:40, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep --I completely agree with Scjessey. Yes I do know the difference between categories and user space. If you take the "fun" (as scjessey put it) and interesting quirks away from wikipedia; you'll only make it a sterile, dull place. Unless the category is somehow divisive (which none of these seem to be), then I don't see the harm in keeping them. Go find something else to delete like this: Tossed salad. —MJCdetroit 20:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe I was uncler. My point was that deleting a categry does not take the fun out of anything. You can still say this on your user page, without the useless category. How does the category make it less dull? Dmcdevit·t 06:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all of dmcdevit's nominations in today's log. They are indiscriminate user categories with no practical value. I'm not too concerned about social communication between users that the categories might enable. Shalom ^Hello 03:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Knowing who is mixed handed or not is not helpful to any aspect of wikipedia in the least. If users wish to have this information, they can do it on their userpage. Having a category is pointless. VegaDark (talk) 03:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - being "fun" or "social" is not the point of a userpage. This is an encyclopedia, not Myspace. --Haemo 05:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - "None of these types of categories has any particular value to Wikipedia". Enough said. MER-C 09:20, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Hey, everybody! Let's play "User Category"! Let's all come up with a funny category, and everybody will join it and have fun and laugh! ... See how LOW we're getting when we have to resort to THIS kind of "social gratification"? --WaltCip 04:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

June 25

Category:Wikipedians with Cubes of Ultimate Power

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose. Furthermore, this category only has one user in it. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Only one user in the category. No real purpose to aid in collaboration. --_Hdt83 ^Chat 05:53, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, too specific to be collaborative.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:05, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:29, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 22:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete the category barely makes sense, let alone serves any collaborative purpose. --Haemo 05:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians with Brain Cancer

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose. Furthermore, this category only has one user in it. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, too specific to be collaborative.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use XMMS

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose. Furthermore, this category only has one user in it. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment It has more than one user in it > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 16:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete using a given music player is a very general activity which belies no special expertise in the subject matter. No collaborative merit. --Haemo 09:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who play Nintendo 64 games

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, too specific to be collaborative. Would be better served with a WikiProject.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:07, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep there are over 500 WPedians in this category, all of whom apparently find it appropriate. This is not divisive. I do not support removing any widely used category on the vague grounds of not social network or no useful purpose. The thought that 3 or 4 people here can tell the general group what to do in circumstances like this is just paternalism. I don't use boxes of this sort, but i don't see why I should interfere with those who do unless there is a good reason. WP is not myspace, but there are distinct social aspects in WP; that isn't why people ought to be joining primarily, but it is a factor--we can & should call this a community. DGG 22:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • No one claimed it was divisive. The argument is that they are directed towards social networking, not encyclopedia-building. You seem to be saying that the reason for it inclusion is just because a lot of users use it, regardless of merit. You can disparage deletion discussions as "paternalism" all you want, but the suggestion seems to be that categories with many users in them can never be deleted, even with a nomination at the relevant forum, which strikes me as illogical. Dmcdevit·t 00:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would require a stronger reason than any put forth to revoke what they choose to do, and I'd want to see what arguments the users could raise. I doubt more than a very few know of these discussions. "Not encyclopedic" and "no useful purpose" are rather flexible and unspecific arguments & can be applied to anything disliked. I'd like to see for each category, with individual arguments, whether any harm could actually be shown, and what benefits could be found--but not at the rate of 50 per day, but with time enough to discuss each one. DGG 05:12, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No one is alleging that something has to "do harm" to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia, simply being inappropriate is enough. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social networking site, and just because you consider social networking harmless, does not mean we should accept excessive, wasteful concern for networking instead of the encyclopedia. Dmcdevit·t 06:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I do not see any reason how this creates a social network and how it serves no collaborative purpose. Each of these users could very easily contribute towards WP:NINTENDO, and as for the social networking, it's no more Myspacey as the userbox. Have these 500 users created the N64 cabal all of a sudden? Have they all of a sudden started to talk about how Super Smash Bros. is the greatest game on Earth? If they needed help verifying information on that article, could they ask someone else in this category? I think the answers are apparent in all these questions. bibliomaniac15 ^{BUY NOW!} 00:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• You know, those are some nice strawmen, but no one has really uggested any of the wild accusations you imply. It's interesting that you mention WP:NINTENDO, because if I were looking for assistance, I'd ask someone in Category:WikiProject_Nintendo_members. Dmcdevit·t 00:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no collaborative merit. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I believe this can help with collaboration on our many N64 game articles. --- RockMFR 22:34, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Category:WikiProject_Nintendo_members groups people willing to contribute to Nintendo articles more effectively. Redundant and prime for abuse. MER-C 09:22, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• How is this possibly abusive? --- RockMFR 16:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - literally billions of people do, or have done this. It is far too general, and does not imply any level of interest in writing articles about it. No collaborative merit. --Haemo 09:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Billions of people play Nintendo 64? That's completely wrong. --- RockMFR 16:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm pretty sure that at some point in time, at least 1 billion people have played a Nintendo 64. Maybe not all at once, but given its popularity and ubiquity, I'd say it's a fair bet. --Haemo 22:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• No really, that's complete crap. However, how does the number of people who have played it have anything to do with this category? --- RockMFR 23:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The generality of a category of action reduces the ability of people to collaborate on it. Catgeory:Wikipedians who use Windows or Category:Wikipedias who drive cars would be so broad as to be entirely useless for any encyclopedic purpose. --Haemo 00:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

do you then accept the appropriateness of the possible categories Catgeory:Wikipedians who do not use Windows Category:Wikipedias who do not drive cars? (incidentally, have you any data for your assumption that almost all WPedians have played these games?) DGG 19:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What does that non sequitur have to do with this discussion at all? Surely just because a category is argues to be unnecessary because of broadness does not mean that its opposite must be necessary. Catgeory:Wikipedians who do not use Windows is an absurd category no matter how many people could fit in it, as there is no potential for anything useful to come out of it. This is an encyclopedia. Dmcdevit·t 23:17, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedian autodidacts

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose. Furthermore, this category only has one user in it. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:34, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Actually, there are NO users in this group; the "one member" is itself (it's a member of its own group). A little recursion seems to be common with many of these less useful categories. Horologium t-c 00:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no collaborative merit, and empty to boot. --Haemo 09:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Windows 2003

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• &Delete only 5 users.DGG 22:34, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Windows Server 2003

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians by pet

An subcategories: Category:Wikipedians who love cats, Category:Wikipedians who love horses, Category:Wikipedians who own Tamagotchis, Category:Wikipedians who own birds, Category:Wikipedians who own cats, Category:Wikipedians who own cockroaches, Category:Wikipedians who love dogs, Category:Wikipedians who own dogs, Category:Wikipedians who own fish, Category:Wikipedians who own guinea pigs

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep there are a great many WPedians in this set of categories, all of whom apparently find it appropriate. This is not divisive. I do not support removing any widely used category on the vague grounds of not social network or no useful purpose. The thought that 3 or 4 people here can tell the general group what to do in circumstances like this is just paternalism. I don't use boxes of this sort, but i don't see why I should interfere with those who do unless there is a good reason. WP is not myspace, but there are distinct social aspects in WP; that isn't why people ought to be joining primarily, but it is a factor--we can & should call this a community. There are better things to do than trying to delete inoffensive categories. DGG
• Keep. I see no reason how this category makes Wikipedia more like a Myspace. Suppose, for instance, I would like to verify information on the Cockroach article that may need some personal experience. A category sure beats sifting through a whole bunch of userboxen looking for someone who has a cockroach for a pet. bibliomaniac15 ^{BUY NOW!} 00:54, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - we cannot "verify information" by requesting personal anecdotes from someone with them. That's directly contrary to verifiability guidelines --Haemo 01:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Wikipedia:User categories for discussion#Category:Wikipedians by parenthood. Having a pet is no more collaborative than having a child. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:37, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all - Knowing who "owns" or "loves" certian animals is absolutely useless to Wikipedia. If people want to collaborate on articles relating to these animals, they should have an appropriately named category, such as "Wikipedians interested in collaborating on cat related topics". VegaDark (talk) 03:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per above. No collaborative potential, asking these people for information regarding pets would be original research. MER-C 09:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who are semi pro gamers

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, I think only professionals would need to be consulted.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:08, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:37, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who play table football

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep there are many WPedians in this category, all of whom apparently find it appropriate. This is not divisive. I do not support removing any widely used category on the vague grounds of not social network or no useful purpose. The thought that 3 or 4 people here can tell the general group what to do in circumstances like this is just paternalism. WP is not myspace, but there are distinct social aspects in WP; that isn't why people ought to be joining primarily, but it is a factor--we can & should call this a community. One ed. doesnt think it helps social function; 184 think otherwise. There are better things to do than trying to delete inoffensive categories. I think it might be a good idea to ask the users here for comments--it affects them, it does not affect Dmcdevit, Cordesat, , Flonight, or me. DGG 23:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - playing table football is a very general activity which millions of people do. It belies no special expertise or incentive to contribute to an encyclopedia. No collaborative merit. Oh, and I believe that ensuring that Wikipedia does not begin the slow slide into becoming a social networking site based around an encyclopedia is a very good thing to be doing. --Haemo 09:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who play alternate reality games

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose. Furthermore, this category only has one user in it. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The pages in Category:Alternate reality games can get out of hand when a particular game is active and people want to spread every minor clue or speculative material that exists. Any users in it may be consulted as potentially familiar with the notability of individual ARGs at AfD. There's only one user because s/he has not listed it on userbox pages for others to see. –Pomte 22:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• delete un-needed overlap with the individual games. just one user. DGG 22:56, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who play Zone

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose. Furthermore, this category only has two users in it. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians by political organization

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, a users personal opinion towards any organization does not comment on the validity (or NPOV) of their contributions.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC) ].[reply]
• Keep there are many WPedians in this and the included categories, all of whom apparently find it appropriate. This is not divisive. I do not support removing any widely used category on the vague grounds of not social network or no useful purpose. In grouping the contained categories together it has a function, like categorization in general. The thought that 3 or 4 people here can tell the general group what to do in circumstances like this is just paternalism. I don't use categories of this sort, but i don't see why I should interfere with those who do unless there is a good reason. WP is not myspace, but there are distinct social aspects in WP; that isn't why people ought to be joining primarily, but it is a factor--we can & should call this a community. There are better things to do than trying to delete inoffensive categoriesDGG 22:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who support Amnesty International

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, personal opinions add no validity to any contribution you might make.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep there are many WPedians in this category, all of whom apparently find it appropriate. This is not divisive. I do not support removing any widely used category on the vague grounds of not social network or no useful purpose. The thought that 3 or 4 people here can tell the general group what to do in circumstances like this is just paternalism. WP is not myspace, but there are distinct social aspects in WP; that isn't why people ought to be joining primarily, but it is a factor--we can & should call this a community. One ed. doesnt think it helps social function; 277 think otherwise. There are better things to do than trying to delete inoffensive categories. I think it might be a good idea to ask the users here for comments--it affects them, it does not affect Dmcdevit, Cordesat, Esprit15d, Flonight, or me. DGG 23:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - supporting an organization is a very general thing, and belies no special expertise or incentive to contribute to articles about it, or anything else. Has no collaborative merit -- I also feel that preventing Wikipedia from becoming a social networking site is a very good thing to be doing. --Haemo 09:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP has had to some extent the role of a social networking site since the day it began; you are of course completely right that it should be much more than a social networking site, and appropriately this element is a very small portion of WP. I don't think these categories put it into danger. DGG 19:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, as DGG. --It's-is-not-a-genitive 11:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as: 1)not a likely source of social networking, if any, 2) some of the supporters of this organization may be very cognizant about it and 3)supporting Amnesty International as a category may help POV situations by disclosing up front a potentially significant ideological position.--Ramdrake 11:54, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedian DC Downsizers

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians with World Citizenship

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• keep 3 eds. think it has no purpose--199 think otherwise. Rampant paternalism. DGG 23:08, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - this is a "not" category; and "rampant paternalism" is not a reason to keep an article; voting is evil. --Haemo 09:48, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Ever hear of "blind following the blind" DGG?--WaltCip 18:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete-Though I oppose the unprofessional manner in which it was nominated, and though I think it would make a very good userbox, I really can't see any significant collaborative potential here. Bladestorm 18:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Strict Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose. Furthermore, this category only has two users in it. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, too broad to be collaborative. Actually just an "other" category.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, broad, subjective, useless. --Xiaphias 15:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Two users only, and not a very obvious category. It's defined only as "not libertarian".DGG 02:56, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete undefined category (not linked to an article) with only two members. Not category, as stated in category page. Horologium t-c 11:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Self-educated Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who are ex-cadets

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Goth Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I would like an actual explanation of exactly how this harms the encyclopedia. Those who find such categories to serve a purpose needn't use them. If we made everyone vote yes or no when they joined, only then would it be excessive. DGG 23:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 22:10, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom -- WP:NOHARM is not a valid inclusion criterion. --Haemo 05:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom -- strike, disregard, and discount the WP:NOHARM vote W.E.P.--WaltCip 04:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians by keyboard

And subcategories: Category:Wikipedians who use Dvorak keyboards, Category:Wikipedians who use Plum keyboards, Category:Wikipedians who use TypeMatrix keyboards

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep fortunately, WP is not bounded by one editor's imagination. I see those using Dvorak keyboards a being a particular type of people, ultra-rational/geeky/willing to be out of step in an obvious way, and it can be very useful to bring their view of things into a discussion. The lack of imagination of those who give the same arguments every time does perhaps seem a little noticeable. Perhaps they should go in a (hopefully small) category. (non-serious) DGG 03:07, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete using a particular keyboard belies no special skills or merits beyond using a keyboard of that type. Assertions that we can stereotype people in a way which would be sufficient to provide any merit whatsoever based on their choice of keyboard defies all common sense and is probably offensive to boot. I know I wouldn't like being labeled a "geek" because I use a particular keyboard type, and I definitely wouldn't want Wikipedia keeping a category because they endorse that characterization. --Haemo 09:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians by internet access

And subcategories: Category:Wikipedians who contribute in cybercafés, Category:Wikipedians who use AOL, Category:Wikipedians who use COX High Speed Internet, Category:Wikipedians who use Rogers Internet, Category:Wikipedians who use Sprint Mobile Broadband, Category:Wikipedians who use WightCableNorth Internet

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete incredibly trivial, and in no way allows users to work together. --Haemo 09:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians by peer-to-peer network

And subcategories: Category:Wikipedians who use BitTorrent, Category:Wikipedians who use Gizmo Project, Category:Wikipedians who use Soulseek

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 04:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia isn't a social network and this doesn't serve any real purpose in building the encyclopedia. --Coredesat 05:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

June 24

Category:Pyromaniac Wikipedians

It's a fun category, for sure, but it's not one that helps the encyclopædia. Blast ^{[improve me]} 25.06.07 0354 (UTC)

• Delete, considering this is illegal an arguably unsettling, such a collaboration (if any) should be discouraged..--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:11, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Pyromania isn't illegal. --Xiaphias 15:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Well arson is, which this usual leads to, hence the disorder. This isn't talking about candle burners.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 21:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Can see no useful purpose for collaboritive editing or social. FloNight 20:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep doesnt actually advocate setting fires, just a light touch. Good for the encyclopedia. DGG 23:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • In what way is being a pyromaniac, arsonist or not, good for the encyclopedia? Dmcdevit·t 14:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User cz

Category:User cz (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Merge / Redirect into Category:User cs, convention of Category:Wikipedians by language, see also List of ISO 639-1 codes. -- Prove It ^(talk) 23:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Support merge, no reason for duplication. Blast ^{[improve me]} 25.06.07 0359 (UTC)
• Merge as incorrect code. –Pomte 22:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who listen to video game music

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. No redeeming value. MER-C 08:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --Bhadani (talk) 09:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This shows wikipedians that are interested on contributing in relevant sections about video game music. Such category can help cooperative works. This isn't pointing to any likes or dislikes. E&M^(talk) 20:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Every VG featured article has or needs an audio section, plus we have many articles devoted to video game music and soundtracks. Certainly can help collaboration. --- RockMFR 17:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed, that is why I would contact someone in Category:WikiProject Video games members for help, not someone who merely states they listen to it, without any expressed expertise or desire for editing related articles. Dmcdevit·t 19:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • It should be reasonable to assume that someone who listens to video game music would be more likely to have knowledge of and be interested in collaborating on such articles than someone who is a general member of the WikiProject. Contacting the latter would be a spammy stretch as they in no way implied interest in editing video game music-specific articles. –Pomte 22:28, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • This is a wiki. If that category isn't specific enough for you, do something about it. Dmcdevit·t 14:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep a few eds. think it has no purpose--the people who use it think otherwise. Let everyone decide for himself himself. Rampant paternalism. Rule-creep. DGG 23:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • You have given no reason why the category is useful. Dmcdevit·t 14:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Distinctly pointless. Guy (Help!) 14:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Macintosh computers

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep Merge with "Wikipedians who use Mac OSX", and "Wikipedians who use iBook G4 computers". -Much as I dislike macs, an easy way to find people with personal experience with macs and osx could, at least conceivably, aid in collaboration. Bladestorm 06:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Category:WikiProject Macintosh members is thataway. This category is just for social networking purposes, not collaboration. Dmcdevit·t 06:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't see why it's necessary to assume bad faith here. That said, after thinking about some of the other proposed categories for deletion, I'm slightly changing my vote. Bladestorm 06:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't understand how anything I have said indicates bad faith has anything to do with it. Lots of people come to Wikipedia and create inappropriate content mistakenly. Requesting deletion is not an assumption of bad faith on the part of those people. Dmcdevit·t 06:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • I may have overstated my point, but I think that saying, "This category is just for social networking purposes, not collaboration" (emphasis mine), jumps to a conclusion, to the exclusion of all others. In any event, we both know the other's opinions, so let's see what others have to say. :) Bladestorm 07:00, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the Wikiproject participant category groups people willing to contribute stuff relating to Apple products more effectively. Redundant and prime for abuse. MER-C 09:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Bhadani (talk) 09:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per MER-C. Also apply !vote to all other such categories currently up for discussion. Blast ^{[improve me]} 25.06.07 0401 (UTC)
• weak keep or consider a merge per Bladestorm. JoshuaZ 14:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use iBook G4 computers

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with "Wikipedians who use Macintosh computers" -There is potential for collaboration. Bladestorm 06:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per points made re: Category:Wikipedians who use Macintosh computers. MER-C 09:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Bhadani (talk) 09:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• merge' per Bladestorm
• Keep this and all other categories of this sort except the empty one and the ones with only one user. This is a rampant paternalism. Adding up the number of people who have spoken for deletion, its about 10. Adding up the people who use these categories, is probably about 10,000. It is of course possible for all 10 thousand to be wrong and the ten to be right. But I think users determine what categories they think useful. Action here is only needed about particular tones that are actually divisive or otherwise disruptive. The people who decided what's encyclopedic are the editors in general by consensus, and they have clearly decide. The consensus is a thousand to one against.

I dont use these categories--i find them useless to me. But I dont see why other people who find them useful should bother me in the least. This is user space. DGG 23:49, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Mac OS X

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with "Wikipedians who use Macintosh computers" -There is potential for collaboration. Bladestorm 06:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per points made re: Category:Wikipedians who use Macintosh computers. MER-C 09:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• merge per Bladestorm. JoshuaZ 14:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Skeptical Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Skepticism is quite relevant to encyclopedia building, as we need readers and editors who do not take content at face value. There are many articles for them to collaborate on. Although I'm skeptical of the likelihood of any substantial collaboration, the potential should not be eliminated merely by the above arguments. Wikipedia is not MySpace, but Wikipedia is still a community. There's no evidence that the category is being used for MySpace-y purposes. –Pomte 06:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed there is evidence. Editors interested in collaborating on skepticism-related articles, a good thing, should populate Category:WikiProject Rational Skepticism members. Instead, this category is populated by uerboxes like User:One/Userboxes/User skeptic, which do not express interest in collaborating, which is easily done with {{User WikiProject Rational Skepticism}}, it expresses a user's personal opinion, skepticism. That is what is Myspacey, and inappropriate, about it. Dmcdevit·t 06:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Then it seems the userbox should be deleted as well as the category that comes along with it. Skepticism is not an opinion, and editors are encouraged to put forth their (rational) opinions anyway, especially if it's relevant in some way to the encyclopedia. The users not in the WikiProject should be notified of it if this is deleted. –Pomte 08:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I agree that joining the WikiProject is better, so there is little need for this category. Delete the category but not the user box. --Bduke 07:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. Redundant to superior Wikiproject participants category. MER-C 08:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedian zodiac skeptics

Category:Wikipedians who support the Jade Ribbon Campaign

Category:Wikipedians who support the World Food Programme

Category:Wikipedians who support Médecins Sans Frontières

Category:Burner Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, too specific to be collaborative. Even too specific for a Wikiproject.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedian Burners

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep a well known cultural event, interpreted loosely, about which there are articles. Collaboration is needed. Merge the other one into here or vice versa. DGG 00:22, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who homeschool

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. No redeeming value. MER-C 09:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• 'Keep there are many relevant articles, so the collaboration opportunities are there.DGG 23:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Deaf Culture Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. No redeeming value. MER-C 09:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep They may have useful information or perspectives on Deaf culture.--T. Anthony 02:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per T. Anthony". Users in this category may contribute additional information not known by the general public without it being original research.--Ramdrake 03:22, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Deleting this cat would be tantamount to deleting gay Wikipedians. Deaf culture is a distinct culture and being able to collaborate with persons (both deaf and those raised by deaf parents) would be a huge asset both in regards to language, subculture, and physiology - not only in the US, but abroad.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 12:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep per above. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 14:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep - distinct and important culture.  ← ROGER →  ^TALK 19:34, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete with the proviso that Category:Wikipedians who are deaf is kept. One category is appropriate, but two is overcategorization. There are very few people who fit into this category that do not also fit into the more general cat. Horologium t-c 23:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Deaf Wikipedians

Category:Demoscener Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, doesn't match any of the aforementioned criteria. // Gargaj 08:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Have you found this category useful in finding other editors interested in demonscene articles, such as those in Category:Demoscene? How many of them have you collaborated with, and to what extent? It would be really informative for this discussion. –Pomte 08:32, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• If so you can create a Wikiproject with it's own non-social networking category. Either way, we shouldn't have social networking categories like this. Delete. MER-C 09:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• WikiProjects often go inactive, and one can do more productive things than to create one. The user category serves as a more direct way for communication. Of all places, I don't see why demosceners would use Wikipedia for social networking. Why would another category called Category:Wikipedians in WikiProject Demoscene suddenly eliminate any potential social networking? –Pomte 09:37, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• If I want to network, then I go to Pouët, Scene.org or do it via Facebook and not Wikipedia. Wikipedia is the latest place I would choose for networking of any kind that goes beyond finding and identifying other editors who are knowledgable about a subject and can help with related articles. My to-do list is already long and the best way to get a subject covered in a new article is to ask for help from somebody who can help and also has probably some interest to actually get his hands dirty and contribute to the article. --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 10:35, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, for reasons that Gargaj stated. I see absolutely no reason to delete this category. It's one of the very few user categories that actually make sense. DiamonDie 09:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep this is a specialized type of media,and we need to know where the experts are. DGG 00:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep The subject is niche and even more so in the English speaking parts of the world. As DGG already pointed out, this is an important means to find other editors that are familiar with the subject to be able to coordinate efforts to cover this vast but still specialized and niche topic properly in Wikipedia. The category might gets replaced by a full blown project and make the category obsolete, but until then is it everything we have. It is hard enough to get people motivated to contribute to Wikipedia and to coordinate efforts. Don't make it harder by removing the bit structure and organization that exists today --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 10:26, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hyphy Wikipedians

Category:Homeless Wikipedians

Category:Wikipedian Teetotalers

Category:Hacker Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• D3l3t3 per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• 1)31337 per above. No redeeming value, superseded by Category:Wikipedians by programming language. MER-C 09:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete' - same as above. —Christopher Mann McKay^{user talk} 00:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sabbatarian Wikipedians

Category:Nudist Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Coredesat 06:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• For a collaborative purpose, ask all these users to verify and contribute to List of social nudity places. There's Timeline of non-sexual social nudity for the academic bunch, and events for the active bunch. –Pomte 06:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Bhadani (talk) 09:37, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep these tend to be hard articles to source, and its good to know where to find help.DGG 00:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I can't help but think, though a bit immoral, that DGG is spot-on right; this is a user category where the horse speaks for his master. Keep.--WaltCip 18:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I see no reason why this should be deleted. __meco 19:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Punk Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 06:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Already listed below, under #June 22. You should probably state your deletion position there. –Pomte 06:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, that is a merger proposal. I've pointed up here for the deletion nomination. Dmcdevit·t 06:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

June 23

Category:Wikipedians who use iPods

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. E&M^(talk) 23:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. Using an iPod is very general, and will not help anyone collaborate on articles. --Haemo 23:50, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. Wikipedia isn't myspace. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - We don't need to categorize people who "use" IPods. Rename to "Interested in IPod topics" if you want to collaborate. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Religious Wikipedians

Category:Wikipedians who support Citizen Media

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as Wikipedia isn't a soapbox for expressing a personal religious/political opinion. MER-C 03:26, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - We don't want a "support" category for every group. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who support HD DVD

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. "Supporting" a standard will not help anyone work together - it implies no expertise, and merely expresses a consumer preference. --Haemo 23:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as Wikipedia is not a soapbox for expressing consumer preferences. MER-C 03:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - We don't want a "support" category for every technology. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Appears to be a former member of Category:Wikipedians by technology politics; other members include Category:Wikipedians who support Citizen Media and Category:Wikipedians who oppose regional lockout. Citizen Media might actually be an area people could collaborate on, although I'd prefer we all stay away from advocacy categories. Beyond that, I'd say these should go. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anti-communist Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as Wikipedia isn't a soapbox for expressing a personal religious/political opinion. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - "Not" category. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anti-socialist Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as Wikipedia isn't a soapbox for expressing a personal religious/political opinion. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - "Not" category. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anti-fascist Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as Wikipedia isn't a soapbox for expressing a personal religious/political opinion. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - "Not" category. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anti-Denominational Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as Wikipedia isn't a soapbox for expressing a personal religious/political opinion. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - "Not" category. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who oppose regional lockout

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. Whoop de doo? I cannot conceive of any purpose where grouping people in this fashion would help the encyclopedia. --Haemo 23:54, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Wikipedia is not a soapbox for expressing views related to digital rights management. That's what the Electronic Frontier Foundation is for. MER-C 03:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - All Support/Oppose categories should be deleted. If people want to collaborate, they can create "interested in" categories. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Based on that, Rename to 'Wikipedians who are interested in Regional Lockout'. -- Jelly Soup 00:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who support peace in Sri Lanka

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. Supporting peace is simply an expression of someone's preferences -- it doesn't imply any ability, or expertise, in the subject area, and thus cannot be used for collaboration. --Haemo 23:55, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as Wikipedia isn't a soapbox for expressing a personal religious/political opinion. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - All Support/Oppose categories should be deleted. If people want to collaborate, they can create "interested in" categories. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Optimist Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. If this category was about the Optimists, then it would work. But it's not, it's just about people who are optimistic. This cannot help people work together. --Haemo 23:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pessimist Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. See my comments on Optimist Wikipedians. --Haemo 23:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Peaceful Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Meritocratic Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. This article is about people who "favour meritocracy". I cannot see any way this will help people work together. --Haemo 23:57, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians by number base preference

And all subcategories: Category:Wikipedians who like base thirteen, Category:Wikipedians who like binary, Category:Wikipedians who like decimal, Category:Wikipedians who like duodecimal, Category:Wikipedians who like hexadecimal, Category:Wikipedians who like octal, Category:Wikipedians who like quinary, Category:Wikipedians who like senary, Category:Wikipedians who like sexagesimal, Category:Wikipedians who like ternary, Category:Wikipedians who like vigesimal

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all no collaborative merit. Liking a particular base does not help anyone work together. --Haemo 23:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• 0xDE1E7EA11 - no redeeming encyclopedic value. I can't see how liking one particular number system aids you in contributing. MER-C 04:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all - Who cares what number base "preference" users have? Isn't helpful at all. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep on this one. Of all the topics raised, this is most specifically relevant to WP editing. DGG 04:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  How? --Haemo 23:00, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who support Blu-ray

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. See my comment on "Wikipedians who support HD DVD" --Haemo 23:59, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as Wikipedia is not a soapbox for expressing consumer preferences. MER-C 03:37, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - All Support/Oppose categories should be deleted. If people want to collaborate, they can create "interested in" categories. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Skype

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. Using Skype is very general, and does not infer any expertise which could assist in articles. --Haemo 23:59, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. Wikipedia isn't myspace. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It is relevant as indicating people who will be available via this communication channel--I know it's a little controversial to rely on it instead of WP talk--so all the more relevant. DGG 19:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use the iTunes Store

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. Using iTunes, or the store, is very general and cannot help people work together. --Haemo 00:00, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. Wikipedia isn't myspace. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use iTunes

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. Using iTunes, or the store, is very general and cannot help people work together. --Haemo 00:00, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as mentioned in the discussion nominee. E&M^(talk) 02:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. Wikipedia isn't myspace. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:IRCTunes supporters

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 07:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no collaborative merit. Also, only one user. --Haemo 00:01, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. Wikipedia isn't myspace. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - All Support/Oppose categories should be deleted. If people want to collaborate, they can create "interested in" categories. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians by Myers-Briggs type

And subcategories: Category:ENFJ Wikipedians, Category:ENFP Wikipedians, Category:ENTJ Wikipedians, Category:ENTP Wikipedians, Category:ESFJ Wikipedians, Category:ESFP Wikipedians, Category:ESTJ Wikipedians, Category:ESTP Wikipedians, Category:INFJ Wikipedians, Category:INFP Wikipedians, Category:INTJ Wikipedians, Category:INTP Wikipedians, Category:ISFJ Wikipedians, Category:ISFP Wikipedians, Category:ISTJ Wikipedians, Category:ISTP Wikipedians

Personality types offer no potential for collaboration. WP:NOT#MYSPACE. Dmcdevit·t 02:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all - Myers-Briggs typography is exceedingly general. A substantial portion of any population will fall into any given one of these categories. They also offer no way to collaborate using this information. As such, this has no collaborative merit. --Haemo 03:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom and above. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 07:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all - Hundreds of Wikipedians find it useful to list their Myers-Briggs type, and being confined to userpages, it does not make Wikipedia 'less encyclopædic.' --It's-is-not-a-genitive 11:50, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Non-smoking Wikipedians

Category:Smoking Wikipedians

Category:Left-handed Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 02:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no collaborative merit. Being left-handed, although uncommon, is not that rare. Also, it offers no way for people who share this attribute to work together -- contrary to popular opinion, lefties are not actually different from the rest of us in any meaningful way. --Haemo 03:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and above. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 07:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. Wikipedia isn't myspace. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - All people are either left or right handed, no need to ever go looking for left handed people in this category. VegaDark (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep left-handed people have to face challenges in this world where 90% of the population is right-handed and just about all implements are made for right-handed people. There is a potential for collaboration at least on items made for left-handed people.--Ramdrake 12:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians with Cataplexy

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 02:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom ^demon^{[omg plz]} 07:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. Wikipedia isn't myspace. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Utilitarian Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 02:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom ^demon^{[omg plz]} 07:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep If a category by itself cannot serve a collaborative purpose, then how can any? Utilitarianism is a huge position in ethics and the pages in Category:Utilitarianism need serious attention from people knowledgeable in it. –Pomte 03:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Google Earth

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 02:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no collaborative merit. Using a popular software program does not make anyone more likely to work on it in an encyclopedic fashion. --Haemo 03:11, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and above ^demon^{[omg plz]} 07:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. Wikipedia isn't myspace. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who like Red vs. Blue

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 02:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom ^demon^{[omg plz]} 07:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. Wikipedia isn't myspace. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Irreligious Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 02:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no collaborative merit. So what? No liking something does not induce anyone to working on articles together in any constructive way. --Haemo 03:12, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and above ^demon^{[omg plz]} 07:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as Wikipedia isn't a soapbox for expressing a personal religious/political opinion. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Shouldn't this category have disappeared with all of the other "Wikipedians by Religion" cats? It was a subcat and was included in the deletion discussion. Horologium t-c 01:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians with irregular sleep schedules

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 02:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no collaborative merit. I am in this category -- however, I can't even begin to think of how this would help me work with another editor, let alone be inclined to do so. --Haemo 03:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- A lot of people have irregular sleep schedules and knowing your sleeping habits dosen't really help out Wikipedia. --_Hdt83 ^Chat 03:57, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above—arf! 04:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and all of above ^demon^{[omg plz]} 07:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. Wikipedia isn't myspace. MER-C 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This is certainly relevant to working--it is important to know who is likely to be around at odd hours. There might be possibly even more useful ways of doing it (e.g. WPedians who are likely to be available between 07:00 and 09:00 UTC) people have even mentioning their time zone as a factor in RfAs, and it has not been challenged there--this is particularly relevant for admins. DGG 19:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians experiencing mental health issues

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 02:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no collaborative merit. Way, way too broad to be of any use for collaboration. --Haemo 03:12, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and above ^demon^{[omg plz]} 07:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Too vague a category to aid in collaboration. Seems to be there for people who are unwilling to specifically identify themselves in one of the other child cats of Wikipedians by mental condition—Elipongo (Talk contribs) 22:38, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hyperopic Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 02:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 07:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who believe in Santa

Category:Wikipedians who believe in an afterlife

Category:Car-free Wikipedians

Category:Straight edge Wikipedians

Category:Wikipedians with alcohol problems

June 22

Category:Wikipedians who use AOL Instant Messenger

Category:Wikipedians who drive cars

Category:Punk Wikipedians

Suggest merging Category:Punk Wikipedians to Category:Wikipedians who listen to punk

Nominator's rationale: The two categories are essentially redundant. However, whereas a weak argument for collaborative potential could be made for the second, the title of the first implies a social networking purpose that goes against current policy. Black Falcon ^(Talk) 20:29, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Punk Wikipedians is proposed for deletion above. I don't think listening to punk music is necessarily the same as being "punk" anyway, is it? Dmcdevit·t 06:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Political Compass Categories

This is a group of seven interrelated categories, all of which are tied to User:The Thadman/Userbox/PolCompass. There are six political categories and one that relates specifically to the Political Compass test. Political categories were supposed to be nuked, but these were missed. The final category doesn't facilitate collaboration.

• Category:Economic Neutral Wikipedians
• Category:Economic Left Wikipedians
• Category:Economic Right Wikipedians
• Category:Social Authoritarian Wikipedians
• Category:Social Libertarian Wikipedians
• Category:Social Neutral Wikipedians
• Category:Political Compass Wikipedians

(Note that I have this userbox on my page, and will be affected by the category deletion as well. That's fine with me; I am happy with the userbox alone.) Horologium t-c 19:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete All, as nom. Horologium t-c 19:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: These are identical to the previously deleted WP:UCFD#Category:WSPQ Wikipedians ones below, I must have missed it. It is not necessary to find someone of your own, or any other, political persuasion to foster collaboration, and the net result of these categories is to group users according to point of view, or, at best, to provide for social networking between likeminded users. Dmcdevit·t 19:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I agree with Dmcdevit. The userbox adequately serves the purpose of self-identification. The categories are unneeded and unproductive. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 20:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - actually ideologies could help; this is just a grab back of factoids. Cannot aid in collaboration. --Haemo 03:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Not everyone uses userboxes or even accepts them. Also it gives some sense of the political makeup of the place without being as problematic or partisan as the older political categories.--T. Anthony 02:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment-These categories were created expressly for the userbox. I doubt that even one person on Wikipedia without the userbox is in any of these categories. Horologium t-c 02:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians with Acrophobia

This is a user category used by only one user. Since the concept of height does not exist in an electronic world, it is not relevant to acrophobes' ability or inability to contribute to the encyclopedia. It also serves no collaborative purpose, not in small part due to its broadness. A lot of people have a fear of heights, but there is no reason to assume that they have an inherent propensity or improved ability to edit articles related to acrophobia, except perhaps by recounting their personal experiences (which is not encyclopedic).

• Delete as nom. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep While there is no reason to assume any specific person in this category has "an inherent propensity or improved ability to edit articles related to acrophobia", it is reasonable to assume that some of them do (the same assumption, it seems to me, is fair for any category - no certainties, just possibilities). However, I would not oppose deletion on the basis of a population of less than four users, with no prejudice to recreate if there are more users identifying with this category.--Ramdrake 18:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: it has one user, the creator, with very few edits and only pop culture-related ones. Even if people with a fear of heights were potentially more knowledgeable (which I doubt; it is a common affliction that most people have never even seen the doctor for. I'm no more knowledgeable about bruises or allergies), then whether they have it or not is irrelevant: they should be expressing that expertise, so we don't have to wonder. If the category leaves us wondering, then it isn't serving the supposed purpose of indicating depth of knowledge. Dmcdevit·t 19:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I might argue that any category with only one member is a problem, whether for articles or users. With that in mind, this should probably be merged or deleted. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who don't wish to become administrators

This category is either pointless or divisive. Interpreted simply as a harmless expression of one's lack of desire to be a sysop, the category is unnecessary as it is possible to express that position through the userbox. I can understand the existence of a category for administrator hopefuls seeking advice or nominations, but why would anyone look through a category of people who don't want to be admins? The userbox may be a quick way of preempting nomination offers, but the category itself has no value. The category can also be interpreted as a divisive statement against the role of admins and/or against administrators themselves.

I think the former (innocent but useless) is the more likely of the two, especially since most (if not all) editors in the category were placed there automatically by a template. However, in either case, I think the category ought to be deleted.

• Delete as nom. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom. Another "not" category. A pox on all UBX creators who add categories to every creation. Horologium t-c 18:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I honestly can't see any specific encyclopedia-building insight particular to this user cat. Makes a nice userbox, though; just not a proper usercat. :)--Ramdrake 19:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - "not" categories are very rarely collaborative. This is not one of the rare exceptions.
• Delete per above. Very little (if any) redeeming value. The statement on the top of my talk page would do just fine. MER-C 09:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep, has a specific purpose, and certainly isn't simply a "not" category. It exists so that others don't waste their time planning to nominate the people in this category. Since there are some users who go around habitually attempting to find good potential candidates, this category is a helpful way for those who don't wish to be asked about adminship to avoid it, and save the would-be nominators trouble as well. (I suppose they could do this even without the category, but do you really want them breaking 3RR repeatedly just so that people won't nominate them?) As for the argument that the userbox works just as well, some people don't like userboxes. As such, the category is serving a purpose beyond that of the userbox, is helpful to collaboration on RfA by providing an opt-out list for nominations, and deleting it would have no benefit. --tjstrf talk 09:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom. I also think that persons who do not want to become administrator may indicate so on their user page. No one is going to nominate anyone without at least reading the user page. --Bhadani (talk) 09:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - It is useful to know who does not want to become an administrator. However, people can write this on their userpage. The purpose of categories is to seek out people in a group - There will be no purpose to ever go looking through this category. VegaDark (talk) 20:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep For convenience as it'd presumably be quicker than searching random user pages for this information.--T. Anthony 02:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • But why would you be looking for people who don't wish to become administrators? The reason this would be useful is if you wanted to nominate someone, but then saw they did not want to be an admin-Info you can get by looking on their userpage, we don't need a category. Having a category would imply there would be some value to specifically seeking out those who do not wish to become admins, and I can't think of what that value would be. VegaDark (talk) 03:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There are 246 user pages (and subpages) that transclude the userbox. There are 272 user pages (and subpages) in the category. Some may be substituted, but I'm not going to check because it's a waste of time. We know there exist people who prefer categories to userboxes, so it's definitely possible.. If you want to delete this category, please identify and alert all users who are using this category as the only means of informing others that they do not wish to be nominated. –Pomte 22:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who would like to learn more languages

Category:Wikipedians who visit countries and child cats

Nominator's rationale: Delete - Parent category was discussed at WP:UCFD#Category:Wikipedians who visit countries with a decision of delete. The child categories were not nominated, although 2 comments did advocate their deletion as well (no objection was noted), and as a result the parent cat was emptied, but not deleted. After discussion with the closing admin, I've agreed to nominate the children here for clarity. Suggest that the children be deleted now, which should also allow the parent cat to be eliminated completely. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 13:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The categories included in this nomination are:

Category:Wikipedians who visit countries

Category:Wikipedians who have travelled to France

Category:Wikipedians who have travelled to Greece

Category:Wikipedians who have travelled to Italy

Category:Wikipedians who have travelled to the UK

• Delete perforce, if the parent cat has already been through UCFD and the verdict was delete (unanimous, to boot), this nomination should probably even be speedied. into deletion--Ramdrake 14:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete. If the parent isn't worthy, then the subcats cannot be worthy either. Horologium t-c 15:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Visiting another country does not suddenly endow people with the ability to contribute encyclopedic content to such articles. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all visiting a country will not help you work with others on articles. --Haemo 03:22, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete all. Per nom and don't have encyclopedic contribuition. E&M^(talk) 02:43, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom. VegaDark (talk) 20:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Could be useful for getting images of locations as a visitor would presumably be more likely to photograph things than a native would. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 00:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians in wheelchairs

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete — an abuse of the category system. --Cyde Weys 08:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no apparent collaborative merit. --Haemo 08:37, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Such Wikipedians can offer specific insight on some handicap-related articles. Alternately, could be merged to some supercategory like "Handicapped Wikipedians".--Ramdrake 10:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or Merge per Ramdrake. Mike R 15:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. What specific insights? Any insights unsupported by a source are, by definition, original research. There is no little encyclopedic collaborative merit to this category. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply Insights as to proper wording on subjects dealing with people with disabilities, to give but one example. In any text, how you say it is as important as what you say. Also, these people are likely to be more familiar with some research items with regards to disabilities and readaptation - not a certainty, just a likelihood, but in my mind clearly enough to refute the affirmation that there can be no encyclopedic collaborative merit to this category. Clearly, there is probable reason to believe it can serve some encyclopaedic purpose.--Ramdrake 17:06, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmm ... although I doubt that there is much collaborative merit to the category, your argument is convincing enough for me to replace "no" with "too little" and change my "delete" recommendation to "weak delete". To be honest, I don't think anyone would approach another user to say "I see you've noted that you're handicapped; would you like to help with this handicap-related article?" Maybe it's just me, but I don't see it as a likely occurrence. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 19:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Fair enough. I can see that a non-handicapped person would probably have great misgivings about doing this; a handicapped person might actually find this category useful for that purpose. As I am on the concerned side of this particular category, it didn't occur to me that a non-handicapped person would hesitate using this category.--Ramdrake 19:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • To be specific I don't see myself as in a wheelchair, but I do use one. (At home I crawl, scoot, or roll, but that is usually too slow to go long distance.) There are certain brands of electric wheelchair that I'd have studies or information packets on, but that the average person may not. I'm not sure an article on the Turbo or Per-Mobil is desired, but if it were I might have more information at my place than most people would.--T. Anthony 02:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Zen Nanos or MuVo N200s

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or Merge. Could be useful in finding other Wikipedians to collaborate on articles relating to these devices, but maybe a more broad category, such as "Wikipedians who use Creative MP3 players", would be more useful. Mike R 15:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Too specific. A broader category is still not an appropriate category, as there is little collaborative potential for the cat. Even a merge with iPod users, portable CD player users, and portable cassette player users to "Wikipedians who use portable music devices" will not create a useful category. Horologium t-c 15:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Horologium. I use a wide variety of electronic devices, but that doesn't mean I know anything about them beyond how to use them. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. I certainly do not know about any sources relating to them. I think this category would not be too different from Category:Wikipedians who use toasters. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:52, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as Wikipedia is not a soapbox for expressing consumer preferences. MER-C 03:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Too specific. VegaDark (talk) 20:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Treo

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP If this category has no collaborative purpose what about Category:Wikipedians who use iPods? It has the same relevant information, so it should be deleted too? By the way, the category points to an userbox, that automatically adds everyone who uses it to the category. E&M^(talk) 14:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The userbox can be edited so that it no longer automatically categorises users. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Could be useful in finding other editors to collaborate on topics related to this device. Mike R 15:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I use both a Treo and an iPod, but both facts are unencyclopedic and do nothing to further the project. Other editors with these interests could still be located by forming WikiProjects and by looking at whatlinkshere on the userbox transclusions. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:59, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per After Midnight. A lot of people use a lot of electronic devices ... that doesn't mean they can or have an interest in writing about them. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per rationale given in above nomination. Horologium t-c 17:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as Wikipedia is not a soapbox for expressing consumer preferences. MER-C 03:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who use Unicode

Category:Wikipedians who use wireless connections

Category:Wikipedians who use Bluetooth technology

Category:Wikipedians who use personal digital assistants

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no apparent collaborative merit. Using a PDA does not make anyone more inclined to write about them in an encyclopedic manner. --Haemo 08:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per my arguments on "Wikipedians who use" categories. In general, use of a device does not automatically give the ability or desire to contribute encyclopedic content about that device. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:59, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per rationale given in Wikipedia:User categories for discussion#Category:Wikipedians who use Zen Nanos or MuVo N200s. Horologium t-c 17:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who listen to Pete Rock

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Could be useful in finding other Wikipedians to collaborate on topics related to this artist. Mike R 15:18, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, Category:WikiProject Pete Rock participants is useful for that purpose. This is useful for finding Wikipedians who listen to him regardless of knowledge or propensity for contributions to related articles. Dmcdevit·t 19:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per below: WP:UCFD#Category:Wikipedians who listen to Madonna. MER-C 09:28, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who listen to Madonna

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Could be useful in finding other editors to collaborate on Madonna-related topics. Mike R 15:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Compare Category:WikiProject Queen participants with Category:Wikipedians who listen to Queen. The first one is for collaboration; the second one is for social networking and creating Myspacey home pages. Dmcdevit·t 19:41, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Dmcdevit. The music you listen to has no relevance to Wikipedia and hence this category has no redeeming value. MER-C 09:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)`[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who dislike High School Musical

Category:Wikipedians who play Kya Dark Lineage

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. The two editors currently in the category, User:Hotspot and User:Lanky are both aware of each other and both are currently active on the Kya: Dark Lineage article. I do not know what role, if any, the category played in their collaboration, but I do think that this fact is relevant to this discussion. Perhaps the "collaborative potential" of the category has already been exhausted; perhaps it served no such purpose in the first place. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 19:32, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- How dare you try to get rid of it, its not a category for an article, its for wikipedias who like kya dark lineage, there are other categories just like this and they aren't in question for deletion!!! it will grow you know, i made this category becuase i love kya dark lineage and i want to know who else plays it! and why does it say myspace in the beginning? i hate myspace i would never go there!-hotspot
• Delete - no redeeming encyclopedic value. Wikipedia is not a social networking site, all categories must somehow contribute to the encyclopedia. MER-C 03:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment- its not fair other games get a category!-hotspot
• Organizing users by genre of game may be more useful -- if we keep up one category for every game released, we'll quickly drown in a sea of categories that won't tell us anything more than a quick glance at the article's history page. I would favor deleting this category, on those grounds, but it's far from being the only one. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ovo-lacto Vegetarian Wikipedians

Category:Wikipedians who listen to the Police

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Could be useful in finding other Wikipedians to collaborate on topics related to this band. Mike R 15:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • As with the others, this merely indicates Wikipedians who listen to them regardless of knowledge or propensity for contributions to related articles. Dmcdevit·t 19:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Hm... would genre categories offer more potential for collaboration? Also, this category in particular appears to be completely empty. If this is the result of foul play, that's bad; if this is natural, then the category should probably be deleted. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who drink alcohol

Category:Wikipedians who play White Wolf Games

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Could be useful in finding other Wikipedians to collaborate on topics related to these games. Mike R 15:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are White Wolf games really that specific (or a unique genre) to justify such an argument? I'm not challenging your recommendation, but am genuinely curious. For instance, I would not find this argument convincing if it was Category:Wikipedians who play football or Category:Wikipedians who play cards. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 17:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Upmerge to Category:Wikipedians who play role-playing games. Potentially useful category, I think, but too narrow in scope. My opinion. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:50, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who can solve a Rubik's Cube

Category:Submissive Wikipedians

June 21

Category:Hippy Wikipedians

Category:Paradoxical Wikipedians

Category:Nocturnal Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 00:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Dmcdevit is absolutely correct in the lack of collaborative purpose for this category. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 00:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no collaborative merit, though I could definitely qualify. --Haemo 01:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. VegaDark (talk) 19:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. Horologium t-c 21:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Schizophrenic Wikipedians

Category:Wikipedians who play StarCraft

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 00:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Dmcdevit is absolutely correct in the lack of collaborative purpose for this category. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 00:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no collaborative merit. --Haemo 01:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Could be useful in finding other editors to collaborate on topics related to this game. Mike R 15:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - if collaboration is needed this could be done through a WikiProject. Also, only the category would be removed, not the userbox - so whatlinkshere for the transclusions will still be available. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 15:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• So what's the point? Less than 160 userpages have the userbox, whereas ~182 unique users are in the category. The userbox is optional. The category is more inclusive and easier to use. –Pomte 09:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The point is that categories aren't used for collaboration, WikiProjects are. Feel free to save a list of the users in the category to your userspace prior to deletion to save for future WikiProject creation. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 16:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: while I've closed the below three categories as delete (Protoss, Terran, and Zerh players), I don't feel it would be appropriate to delete this particular category without a wee bit more discussion. As I've involved myself with the discussions below, I'll avoid commenting beyond that. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom & After Midnight. Pepsidrinka 21:43, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. As mentioned by After Midnight, a WikiProject might be useful here; there was a lot of interest in this game when it first appeared. Horologium t-c 21:07, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Protoss Wikipedians

Category:Terran Wikipedians

Category:Zerg Wikipedians

Category:Permawake Wikipedians

Category:Wikipedian homebrewers

Category:Dyslexic Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 00:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Dmcdevit is absolutely correct in the lack of collaborative purpose for this category. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 00:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no collaborative merit. --Haemo 01:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It could be useful to know when a Wikipedian is dyslexic. Mike R 15:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure it could be useful, but how could it be useful to an encyclopedia? Dmcdevit·t 04:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. I agree that it could be useful to know when an editor is dyslexic, but that purpose is filled by the userbox. I'm having a hard time thinking of a use for the category itself. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 20:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep while the userbox would also be useful, I would point out some people seem allergic to them out of principle. Having an alternate way of tagging those who want to tag themselves in this way would make sense.--Ramdrake 20:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Of what benefit to the project is tagging oneself as dyslexic? Dmcdevit·t 04:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as apparently without collaborative merit; in response to Ramdrake's concern over users uncomfortable with userboxes, that's accomplished easily enough by writing "by the way, I'm dyslexic" on one's userpage, no? We don't really need categories for everything, and as much as I can sympathize, this really strikes me as social networking, personally. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Pepsidrinka 21:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nominalist Wikipedians

Category:Pacifist Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 00:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Dmcdevit is absolutely correct in the lack of collaborative purpose for this category. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 00:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The category itself has little or no collaborative merit. Any potential for collaboration is already realised through WikiProject Military history. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 20:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per Black Falcon. Horologium t-c 02:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Metalhead Wikipedians

WP:NOT#MYSPACE. This category serves no collaborative purpose. Dmcdevit·t 00:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, Dmcdevit is absolutely correct in the lack of collaborative purpose for this category. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 00:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no collaborative merit; liking something does not make one likely to contribute to it. --Haemo 01:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge into Category:Wikipedians who listen to heavy metal. I am, of course, assuming that people affiliating "with the culture of heavy metal music" list to heavy metal. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 20:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per Black Falcon. Unless we're uncomfortable recategorizing people without giving them notice, in which case delete. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:38, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merging would be unhelpful. Category:Wikipedians who listen to heavy metal is jut as useless, an should be deleted too. These are users who listen to heavy metal, not users who have declared an interest in collaborating on those articles. Category:WikiProject Metal members already exists. Dmcdevit·t 14:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no collaborative merit to this category. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 01:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The mere fact that a number of Wikipedians feel it is meaningful to list themselves this way is its own justification. Non-encyc pages should be almost purely unregulated; encyc pages should be tightly controlled. Any Delete votes on this page are from people trying to pass edicts in the wrong space. JDG 22:31, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Omnitheist Wikipedians

Category:Single Wikipedians

Category:Thin Wikipedians

Category:Myopic Wikipedians