The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale: Not sure categorization needs to be taken to this level. There's no article on "Centre d'information et de documentation du disque" and the fact that a song reached number one in France is sufficiently defining. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me22:33, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. @Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars: There's a major confusion concerning French charts on the English Wikipedia. The category is part of my attempt to fix the confusion between different charts. There will be an article on the centre (or rather on the chart it compiled from 1968 to 1977) sooner or later, don't worry. --Moscow Connection (talk) 05:54, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it's the Category:Number-one singles in France that shouldn't exist in its current state. We should find out which chart a song charted on exactly and move it to the appropriate category. Cause I'm afraid there are websites that contain some strange lists of number-one songs without saying which charts those were. And people are using the websites on Wikipedia as sources for charts positions, and it's a real mess, believe me. Could you please not interfere with my attempt to improve the coverage of French charts on the English Wikipedia? I can promise I will add some more songs to the category. It is a step towards reliably sourcing French chart positions prior to 1984. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:41, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Best to create the article and lists first before creating a category for it. Please remember that Wikipedia is a collaborative effort and we work towards consensus. If you put it out there in mainspace, anyone is free to contribute. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me23:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"If you put it out there in mainspace, anyone is free to contribute." — That's exactly what I did. I put this category out in mainspace and I thought other people would notice and populate it with some articles. :-) By the way, French Wikipedians know about the chart. Here's an example of a discussion mentioning it I came across: fr:Discussion utilisateur:Lethiernois#article Dalida. --Moscow Connection (talk) 06:14, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
I'd be ok with that rename of this category. However to rename other categories they should be cfd-tagged and checked for any articles about radars etc that wouldn't fit the new name. DexDor(talk)22:21, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Keep. Previous deletion IMHO is not a justification for deleting in the present. I started it again because other honor societies have categories. Phi Beta Kappa, as one of the oldest and most prestigious, deserves a category just as much as other honor societies. Postcard Cathy (talk) 20:31, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That’s ludicrous. For example, someone could have created an article on Britney Spears when she was singing around he hometown, be it the church choir, school chorus, whatever. Fine, delete it as non notable. So, when she becomes an international superstar, are you going to delete the new article because the earlier article was deleted? In this example, it is an issue of timing. In other cases, such as this, it could be that the original reason to delete was erroneous. Postcard Cathy (talk) 23:38, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I read the Wikipedia on the org and looked at how the category is used. I fail to find any information which leads to me understand how anyone would identify as a member of this organization, and what they would do differently for being a member of this group. As best as I can tell this organization issues a credential which is supposed to be a mark of a person being a good student. According to the wiki article about 10% of students at schools with a chapter of this organization get invitations to join. This seems like a top 10% club. I do not see proof that typical members cite their participation in this organization as a defining life activity. Besides that, we are supposed to apply categories to wiki articles when the text of the article has information and a citation about how the person fits in the category. I cannot readily see biographies which state how membership in this group fits into anyone's life story or what the significance of this organization in someone's life is. This seems like a group with some kind of procedural membership process rather than a deeper meaning to membership. If anyone has another story to tell, then tell the story with text and citations on a wiki article and demonstrate a perspective which builds a case for this category to be "defining". Blue Rasberry (talk)16:03, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Then to be consistent, delete all the other honor society categories as well as the other Phi Beta categories. Otherwise all the people listed here can be transferred to the parent category. And there is absolutely no reason why Phi Beta Kappa should be singled out while othe honor society categories remain.Postcard Cathy (talk) 23:50, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
If merged, the contents should also be merged to Category:Cargo ships. However, it was claimed in another nomination on this page that real and fictional items should not be mixed, in which case let's keep this; there must be scope to add to it. – FayenaticLondon10:52, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Which nomination is that? I see a few related noms here, but I didn't see that claim. There's nothing at "Cargo ships" to indicate that it's intended only for real ships (maybe there should be?). I'm leaning toward merge on this, but if the feeling is that real vs. fictional should be broken out then keep would seem appropriate. DonIago (talk) 15:09, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's a guideline, but it's one which makes sense to me. I'd thus oppose merging with "Cargo ships", but merging with other fictional cats may still be merited. DonIago (talk) 15:52, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A freighter that is not notable enough for an article about it, and a tactical exercise that is. WP:NONDEF says that articles can't be added to categories unless it directly defines the subject of the article, which in this case is about the training simulation. The lede doesn't even mention it's a cargo ship, merely saying it's a civilian vessel, because that fact is unimportant and non-defining.ZXCVBNM (TALK)14:51, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Comment: user:Caftaric moved this in October, without notice or discussion. Caftaric, please explain your action. Also, please use WP:CFD processes in future; IIRC, you have seen before how much work it can create for others to follow up your actions. – FayenaticLondon10:49, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
ZXCVBNM: Please do not propose merges to only one parent, which would remove the contents from the other hierarchies where they also belong. – FayenaticLondon
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
