Support – needless duplication. "Lakes of" categories are sufficient. NI lakes are already in both categories, so minimal change needed. Declangi (talk) 21:23, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Sionk: the use of "lakes" vs "loughs" on Irish categories was discussed extensively at CfD 2018 April 7#Lakes of the Republic of Ireland, where the consensus was to accept the piles of evidence I presented that Irish usage prefers "Lakes" as the collective noun. I would have included the Northern Ireland "loughs" cats in that nomination if I had been aware of their existence. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 07:53, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I really haven't the faintest idea how these random esoteric Google searches prove anything. Fancy finding any books or sources about lakes or loughs in Northern Ireland? Wouldn't you consider Google maps and Ordnance Survey to be far more reliable proof of what the lakes of Northern Ireland are called? Sionk (talk) 17:44, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Sionk:random esoteric???? What earth are you on about? Those searches are neither random nor esoteric. As set out at WP:COMMONNAME they a comprehensive tests of which collective noun is used in WP:reliable sources: same set of phrases applied to both loughs and lakes and repeated on 3 sets of sources. The result is exceptionally clearcut. Maps are utterly useless because they do not use text to describe a set. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 21:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is whether people use the word 'lough' or 'lake' to describe these bodies of water in Northern Ireland, not whether they use the titles of Wikipedia categories "Loughs of Fermanagh" etc. I would say newspaper articles such as this one in the Belfast Telegraph and this one in The Independent (London)clearly show the word 'lough' is used in the English language to describe these bodies of water. For that matter, there's an official body called the Loughs Agency. This is not a word solely used in Irish Gaelic, but commonly used in English. Sionk (talk) 06:00, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Sionk: You misunderstand the issues on all 3 points:
You say The issue is whether people use the word 'lough' or 'lake' to describe these bodies of water in Northern Ireland. Not so: a) our usage here is not naming individual lakes; it is what collective noun is most commonly used when referring to groups of them, as we do in these category titles. b) per WP:COMMONNAME, the test is not some vague "people use"; it is "the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)". Note: reliable sources. Hence my numeric data on reliable sources.
Cherry-picked examples to support your case do not address the test of what is most commonly used. Your reliance on 2 examples is like saying that you can identify 2 American men called "John", so most American men are called "John".
There is indeed an official body called the Loughs Agency. If you had taken 30 seconds to follow the link at the top of that page to http://www.loughs-agency.org/about-us/, then you have seen that there's an official body called the Loughs Agency which is responsible for 2 sea loughs, rather than the freshwater lakes in these categories. You could also have learnt that by reading the previous discussion to which I linked yesterday: CfD 2018 April 7#Lakes of the Republic of Ireland.
It is disappointing to have to waste time refuting the falsehoods posted by an editor who chooses not to read linked policy, not to read a linked previous discussion, and not even to read a website which they cite in evidence. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 07:41, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I strongly suspect that this category cannot grow any larger, though I didn’t look as thoroughly as last time. One of these, Gethen, is not truly an ice planet any more than our Earth is/has been. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:21, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Given the low article count, there is no need to subcategorise from the parent at the moment IMO. SFB21:21, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category is for a defunct team that existed for just one year and whose article page is a redirect. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof?10:00, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It has enough topics to keep. This category brings order to the topic and should be kept. If you want Wikipedia to become less organized and harder to use, then delete it. spatms Talk:spatms17:43, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merge the measurable natural phenomena should remain in "Meteorological phenomena" as a phenomenon is a very specific type of concept. Non-phenomena should be grouped and renamed under Category:Meteorological concepts – I'm not sure what the addition of "basic" is doing here, especially as a non-"basic" parent does not exist. SFB21:28, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
